THE  VENTILATOR. 


THE  VENTILATION 

OF  THE 

RADICAL  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

SHOWING  THE 

MOST  INFAMOUS  SYSTEM  OF  SWINDLING 


THAT  CAN  BE  FOUND 


IN  THIS  OR  ANY  OTHER  COUNTRY, 


WiJ.  t\anVar 

PUBLISHED  BY  THE  DEMOCRATIC  STATE  EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  OF  OHIO 


COLUMBUS : 

OHIO  STATESMAN  PRINT- 

1868. 


) ^>7/,  oq  *4qrh:  V * 7-ff*  2 C>  ' 0 


THE  VENTILATION 

OF  THE 

RADICAL  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES. 


I trust  the  reader  will  not  regard 
me  as  intruding  upon  the  patience 
that  is  too  often  taxed  unnecessarily 
in  personal  explanations.  It  is  due, 
however,  to  myself,  that  I should 
make  some  explanation  in  regard  to 
my  course.  I have  been  a Republi- 
can from  the  organization  of  the  party 
in  1854.  Prior  to  tnat  time,  I was  an 
abolitionist  of  the  strictest  order.  In 
1844,  however,  I voted  for  Mr.  Olay 
for  President.  From  1846  until  1854, 
I acted  with  the  Liberty  party.  I re- 
„ ceived  an  appointment  in  the  Door- 
cL  keeper’s  Department  of  the  House  of 
& Representatives,  through  the  influ- 
Qc  ence  of  my  member  of  Congress,  Gen- 
eral Coburn,  in  the  beginning  of  the 
Fortieth  Congress.  I continued  in 
that  position  until  the  first  of  July, 
1868,  when  I resigned  my  place.  I 
endeavored  to  discharge  my  duty  in 
the  very  humble  position  I held  in 
the  House,  with  as  much  propriety 
and  civility  as  my  nature, mnder  such 
circumstances,  would  allow.  I was 
one  among  many  others  who  were 
wronged,  as  I believed,  by  an  opera- 
tion connected  with  the  Doorkeeper’s 
Department.  I allude  to  the  “ substi- 
tute” matter,  that  is  fully  explained 
in  the  “ Ventilator.”  In  my  efforts  to 
investigate  that  subject,  my  attention 
was  arrested  by  the  many  evidences 
that  were  continually  looming  up  be- 
fore me  of  the  enormous  squandering 
of  public  money  i»  matters  connected 
with  the  House  expenses.  I,  there- 
fore, determined  to  devote  my  atten- 
tion to  the  wijole  subject,  and,  if  pos- 
sible, secure  ihe  attention  of  honor- 
able members  to  the  facts  in  the  prem- 
ises. In  this,  however,  I was  most 
sadly  disappointed.  I called  the  at- 
tention of  several  members  to  some 
of  the  more  shameful  abuses  in  regard 


to  the  subject,  but  to  no  purpose.  I 
became  satisfied  that  this  scandalous 
waste  of  money  would  never  be  stop- 
ped, or  honestly  inquired  into,  while 
the  present  party  was  in  power.  I, 
therefore,  determined  to  give  my  ef- 
forts, humble  as  they  are,  to  any  party 
organization  that  would  correct  those 
abuses. 

My  object,  therefore,  in  presenting 
the  following  facts  and  figures  in 
relation  to  the  expenditures  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  is  to  call 
the  attention  of  the  industrial  classes 
of  the  country  to  the  alarming  profli- 
gacy and  extravagances  that  are  con- 
tinually going  on,  and  increasing  to 
such  enormous  and  frightful  propor- 
tions, (and  that  too,  under  the  very 
eyes  of  Congress)  that,  if  not  checked 
by  the  voice  of  the  people,  will  soon 
reduce  the  laboring  millions  of  this 
country  to  the  most  abject  vassalage 
and  dependence  upon  the  will  of  the, 
moneyed  aristocracy  of  the  country 
that  is  experienced  * by  any  people 
upon  earth. 

I hope,  therefore,  that  my  efforts, 
feeble  as  they  are,  may  be  of  some 
service  in  arousing  the  honest  labor- 
ing masses  of  the  couutry  to  a realiz- 
ing sense  of  their  duty  to  themselves, 
their  country,  and  their  God,  in  the 
terrible  struggle  that  is  just  begin- 
ning to  stir  the  already  troubled 
waters  of  political  strife.  Remember 
that  when  the  wicked  rale  the  people 
mourn.  Let  this  Radical  party,  that 
is  held  together  by  the  cohesive  pow- 
er of  public  plunder,  be  hurled  from 
place  and  power  with  that  terribie 
instrument,  the  ballot,  that  makes 
tyrants  and  pretenders  tremble,  when 
wielded  by  the  hand  of  an  honest, 
industrious,  and  an  outraged  people. 

W.  J.  Mankee. 


f 


4 


The  public  mind  has  become  so  accustom- 
ed to  fraudulent  and  extravagant  transac- 
tions in  relation  to  the  people’s  money,  that 
it  would  seem  almost  useless  to  attempt  to 
engage  their  attention  to  that  subject  at  all. 
It  is  a matter  of  the  most  common  occur- 
rence to  read  accounts  in  the  daily  papers 
that  A.  B.  or  C.  D.,  collector  of  customs,  or 
some  other  position  under  the  Government, 
for  the  collection  or  disbursement  of  the 
public  money,  has  been  discovered  to  be 
defaulter  to  a large  amount,  or  that  some 
wliisky-ring  has  cheated  the  Government 
out  of  large  sums  of  money  by  colluding 
with  Government  officials,  or  in  some  other 
of  the  thousand  ways  that  dishonesty  is  so 
fruitful  in  inventing ; all  such  announce- 
ments, however,  are  soon  forgotten. 

There  must  be  some  reason  for  this  seem- 
ing want  of  a proper  vigilance  upon  the 
part  of  the  people  upon  a question  of  such 
vast  importance  to  the  material  interest  and 
permanent  prosperity  of  the  country.  This 
seeming  apathy  arises  from  one  of  two 
causes : either  the  masses  of  the  people  are 
not  informed  as  to  the  extent  and  magni- 
tude of  the  shameless  swindling  that  is  con- 
tinually going  on  in  almost  every  depart- 
ment of  the  Government,  or  they  have  come 
to  the  conclusion  to  toil  on  and  submit  pa- 
tiently to  the  enormous  exactions  that  the 
bondholders , the  capitalists,  and  the  moneyed 
aristocracy  of  the  country — and  last,  but 
not  least,  in  the  list  of  public  plunderers, 
the  law-makers  of  the  land  and  the  officers 
of  the  Government,  whose  duty  it  is  to  pro- 
tect the  interests  of  the  people — may  de- 
mand of  them.  It  looks  as  though  each  one 
who  has  an  opportunity  to  swindle  isvieiDg 
with  the  other  to  outstrip  his  fellows  in 
deeds  of  the  darkest  and  most  villainous 
swindling,  as  I shall,  humiliating  as  it  is,  be 
able  to  demonstrate  to  the  satisfaction  of 
all  candid  minds; 

If  the  people  have  concluded  to  toil  on 
and  still  furnish  this  army  of  swindlers 
with  supplies  to  glut  their  insatiable  thirst 
for  personal  gain,  it  is  with  a hope  that 
they,  like  the  leech  that  hangs  upon  the  liv- 
ing body  and  feeds  upon  the  vital  fluid  un- 
til its  once  lank  and  flabby  form,  from  very 
plethora,  drops  in  disgust  from  the  body 
that  furnished  the  supply.  But  as  yet  we 
see  no  indications  of  the  swindling  crew  fol- 
lowing the  example  of  the  leech;  on  the 
contrary,  we  see  every  man  of  them  ready 
to  again  do  battle  against  the  people’s  in- 
terests in  endeavoring  to  perpetuate  the 
power  of  the  present  ruling  party,  the  bond- 
holders' party,  that  has  already  brought  the 
Government  to  a state  of  bankruptcy,  and 
oppressed  the  industrial  laboring  millions 
of  this  country  with  exactions,  in  the  shape 
of  taxation,  to  an  extent  unheard  of  before, 
and  without  a parallel  in  the  history  of  the 
civilized  World,  while  the  capital  of  the 
country  has  to  a great  extent  been  exempt 
from  taxation.  Banks  have  been  instituted 


at  the  bidding  of  that  same  capital,  with 
privileges  and  immunities  unheard  of  be- 
fore— the  whole  action  of  the  Government 
tending  to  make  the  rich  richer  and  the 
poor  poorer. 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  last 
grain  kicks  the  beam.  This  should  be  an 
admonition  to  the  party  in  power,  I mean 
the  Republican  party.  It  is  said  that  his- 
tory repeats  itself.  That  being  the  case,  we 
have  only  to  look  back  a few  years,  and  call 
the  events  of  this  brief  period  to  mind  to 
determine  the  fate  of  the  party  in  power. 
It  is  within  the  recollection  of  many  that 
the  party  in  power  in  1840  and  1860  lost  the 
confidence  of  the  people ; whether  right  or 
wrong  it  is  not  necessary  to  stop  to  inquire. 
The  facts  are,  the  people  had  lost  confidence 
in  the  ruling  party  more  on  account  of  the 
extravagance  and  the  tendency,  as  the  peo- 
ple believed,  to  concentrate  and  perpetuate, 
in  the  hands  of  dishonest  and  designing 
men,  the  control  of  public  affairs.  The  ter- 
rible rebuke  administered  to  the  party  in 
power  then,  has  been  lost  sight  of  and  for- 
gotten by  the  party  now  in  power. 

Remember  that  history  repeats  itself,  and 
the  same  causes  will  bring  the  same  fate  to 
the  ruling  party  now,  that  overtook  those 
iu  former  years.  The  same  fiery  indigna- 
tion that  hurled  parties  frojn  power  in  for- 
mer years  will,  with  a power  equaled  only 
by  the  fierce  and  mighty  tempest,  led  on- 
ward in  its  desolating  course  by  the  light- 
ning’s flash,  as  a messenger  of  approaching 
danger,  and  driven  by  the  more  terrifying 
peals  of  the  deep-toned  thunder  which  pro- 
claims His  own  majestic  power,  and  defies 
resistance  or  control,  overtake  and  over- 
whelm the  Republicans,  unless  the  confi- 
dence of  the  people  can  again  be  restored 
by  a thorough  reform  in  public  affairs  by 
the  party  n'ow  in  power.  Its  days  are  num- 
bered. The  handwriting  is  already  seen 
upon  the  wall.  Reform  is  impossible  with- 
out a change  in  parties.  A change  is  de- 
manded and  will  be  made.  Hurl  from  place 
and  power  the  party  that  has  become  the 
mere  tool  of  the  bondholders  and  the  mon- 
eyed aristocrats  of  the  land. 

That  once  proud  party  that  held  in  its 
hands  the  destinies  of  the  civilized  world, 
and  had  for  its  votaries  the  master  intel- 
lects of  the  age;  that  proud  party  that 
broke  in  pieces  the  bonds  of  four  million 
human  beings ; that  proud  party  that  sus- 
tained the  country  through  the  terrible  wrar 
that  threatened  the  destruction  of  Republi- 
can goverment,  and  to  whom  the  laboring 
classes  looked  with  bright  hopes  for  the  fu- 
ture, has  degenerated  into  the  willing  tool  for 
dishonest  aud  designing  men.  The  interests 
of  the  laboring  classes  have  been  forgotten. 
The  widow  and  the  uncared-for  children  of 
the  gallant  soldier  who  fell  in  defense  of  the 
country,  are  turned  aside  with  the  pittance 
allowed  them  by  law,  in  a depreciated  cur- 
rency, while  the  rich  bondholder  is  paid  in 


5 


gold  ; the  poor  widow  is  taxed  heavily  upon 
her  mite,  while,  the  bondholder  is  exempt 
from  all  taxation,  and  the  voice  that  is  raised 
in  favor  of  equal  taxation  is  soon  drowned 
by  the  more  stentorian  yells  and  shouts  of 
repudiation  by  the  bondholders  and  their 
friends.  Will  this  condition  of  things  be 
permitted  to  continue  ? Let  the  people  an- 
swer at  the  ballot  box  at  the  next  election. 

The  subject  of  public  expenditures  is  one 
in  which  the  people  have  a greater  interest 
than  any  one  subject  that  can  be  brought  to 
their  attention,  and  especially  so  at  this  time, 
u account  of  the  enormoxxsly  high  taxes, 
noth  State  and  National.  These  high  taxes 
speak  in 'thunder  tones  upon  the  subject  of 
public  expenditures,  and  ought  to  be  a suffi 
cient  reason  with  those  who  control  the  ex- 
penditures to  use  all  the  economy*  in  this 
respect  that  is  possible  ; for  the  people  them- 
selves know  but  little  about  the  manage- 
ment, in  detail  of  public  affairs.  All  they 
fully  realize  is  the  terrible  hurdens  that 
they,  from  year  to  year,  are  required  to  bear. 
My  object,  therefore,  will  be  to  shed  some 
light  upon  the  subject  of  public  expenses. 
This  inquiry,  however,  will  be  confined 
mainly  to  the  expenditures  at  the  Capitol, 
and  especially  the  House  of  Representatives. 
I select  this  particular  branch  of  the  Gov- 
ernment for  the  reason  that  it  is  under  the 
immediate  control  of  Congress,  and  as  a test 
of  party  honesty  and  integrity.  The  party, 
therefore,  can  not  go  back  on  its  own  record 
upon  this  subject,  as  there  is  no  other  de- 
partment of  the  Government  to  share  the 
responsibility. 

Whatever  that  record  discloses,  be  it  good 
or  bad,  it  is  the  record  of  the  party,  and  no 
effort  upon  the  part  of  the  party  majority t in 
Congress  or  out  of  it,  will  be  able  to  shift  or 
avoid  «ZZthe  responsibilities  that  can  attach 
to  their  action  upon  that  subject.  If  the  ex- 
amination of  the  contingent  and  other  expen- 
ses of  the  House,  develop  an  extravagant 
waste  of  the  public  money,  the  people  will 
know  who  to  hold  responsible.  Those  affect- 
ed by  the  publication  of  the  facts  have  no 
just  cause  to  complain,  for  they  made  the 
record  themselves.  If,  in  the  examination 
that  I propose  to  make,  I shall  show  the  exis- 
tence of  a ring  of  swindlers,  more  dark  and 
infamous  than  the  whisky-rings  ot  New 
York,  I trust  I shall  have  the  sympathy  of 
all  honest  men,  whether  in  or  out  of  Con- 
gress, whether  Republicans  or  Democrats. 

A statement  showing  the  expenses  of  the  House 

of  Representatives  for  the  years  ending  June 

30,  1864,  1865,  1866,  1867,  and  1868: 


Tear  ending  June  30,  18G4 $353,630.00 

“ 1865 481^884.00 

“ “ 1866 462,438.00 

* “ 1867 502,081.00 

' ‘ “ “ 1868 725,555.00 

Additional  compensation 100,000.00 


Total $2,625,588.00 


It  will  be  seen  that  the  expenses  of  the 
House  increased  so  enormously,  for  the  last 


five  years,  that  1868  amounts  to  $725,555.00 
more  than  doubling  that  of  1864.  This  in- 
crease can  not  be  accounted  for  upon  the 
grounds  of  necessity,  or  even  decency.  In- 
stead of  this  wonderful  increase,  as  shown  by 
the  foregoing  table,  every  principle  of  hones- 
ty, and  a decent  respect  for  the  interest,  hap- 
piness, and  welfare  of  a toiling,  tax-ridden, 
and  confiding  constituency,  demanded  a re- 
duction rather  than  an  increase,  and  I do  not 
hesitate  iu  asserting  that  the  contingent  and 
officers’  salary  expenses  can,  with  great  pro- 
priety, be  reduced  even  below  that  of  1864, 
without  any  detriment  to  the  public  service. 
Iustead  of  a reduction,  however,  for  the  year 
ending  June  30,  1869,  there  will  be  quite  an 
increase  over  that  of  1868,  as  any  one  who 
has  observed  with  any  care  the  tendency  of 
the  present  Congress  to  extravagance,  and  a 
most  shameful,  and  I might  with  propriety 
say  willful  and  criminal,  disregard  of  the 
high  trust  confided  to  them  as  Representa- 
tives of  the  people. 

To  avoid  any  misunderstanding  in  regard 
to  the  foregoing  items  of  expenses,  I want  it 
impressed  upon  the  minds  of  all  who  care  to 
know,  that  not  one  cent  of  (the  regular  pay 
or  mileage  of  members  of  Congress  is  inclu- 
ded in  the  foregoing  table.  The  salary  of 
members  of  Congress  is  $5,000  a year  and 
twenty  cents  per  mile  for  traveling  from 
their  homes  to  Washington  and  returning. 

For  instance,  if  a member  of  Congress  lives 
five  hundred  miles  from  the  Capitol,  he  re- 
ceives mileage  for  one  thousand  miles  each 
session  during  his  term,  and  an  appropria- 
tion is  made  each  year  for  that  purpose. 

For  the  year  ending  Juue  30,  1868,  the  sum 
of  $1,100,000.00  was  appropriated.  It  will  be 
seen  that  the  whole  expenses  of  the  House 
of  Representatives  for  the  year  ending  June 
30,  1868,  are  $1,825,555. 

My  purpose,  however,  is  to  examine  the 
contingent  fund  and  officers’  salary  fund. 

The  officers  of  the  House,  who  receive  annu- 
al salaries,  are  paid  from  the  salary  fund. 

All  others  in  the  service  of  the  House  re- 
ceive their  pay  from  the  contingent  fund. 

With  this  explanation  in  regard  to  the  sev- 
eral funds,  which  I regard  as  important  to  a 
correct  understanding  of  the  subject  und^r 
consideration,  I shall  proceed  to  examine  in  ) 
detail,  to  some  extent,  the  manner  and  ob- 
jects for  which  the  contingent  fund  is  used; 
and  in  order  to  demonstrate  and  prove  what 
I have  already  intimated,  the  most  disgrace- 
ful and  shameful  use  of  the  people’s  money, 

I shall  be  compelled,  greatly  against  my 
wishes,  to  give  the  names  of  quite  a number 
of  distinguished  gentlemen  who  have  figured 
somewhat  in  making  too  free  a use  of  public 
money,  or  permitting  others  to  do  so,  when 
they  should  have  discharged  with  more  fidel- 
ity the  high  and  holy  obligations  resting 
upon  them,  as  Representatives  and  protec- 
tors of  the  people,  against  all  such  abuses, 
when  it  was  within  their  power  to  prevent 
it.  I can  assure  those  gentlemen  and  others 
connected  with  the  matter,  that  I am  not 


6 


actuated  with  any  feelings  of  unkindness  or 
hostility  toward  them,  and  I feel  quite  sure 
that  they  can  have  no  cause  whatever  for 
the  least  ill-feeling  or  “ unpleasantness  ” to- 
wards me,  for  I shall  be  exceedingly  careful 
to  stick  to  the  record  that  they  themselves 
have  made,  and  such  other  evidence  as  can 
not  be  gain-said  or  disputed.  With  this  un- 
derstanding, I feel  that  I will  have  the  sym- 
pathy and  kind  regard  of  all  concerned. 

^ The  first  item  that  I propose  to  examine  is 
the  item  of  stationery,  and  in  order  to  make 
the  matter  plain  and  forcible,  I shall  insti- 
tute comparisons.  It  is  said  that  compari- 
sons are  odious  things;  that,  however,  de- 
pends upon  circumstances.  If  those  I make 
are  odious,  the  fault  is  not  mine. 

Stationery  for  1868 $77,500.00 

Commutation  of  stationery  for  1868  22, 150.00 

„ . $99,650.00 

stationery  for  1864 $36,600.00 

Commutation  of  stationery  for  1864  2,000.00 

38,600.00 

Excess  of  1868  over  1864 $61,050.00 

This  table  exhibits  the  startling  fact  that 
the  item  of  stationery  for  1868  cost  $61,000 
more  than  for  1864. 

Let  us  examine  that  difference  and  see,  if 
we  can,  what  reasons,  if  any,  could  have 
made  it  necessary  for  this  increase  of  cost  in 
this  item.  It  can  not  be  that  more  station- 
ery was  required  for  the  use  of  the  House  in 
1868  than  1864,  for  there  were  no  more  mem- 
bers in  Congress  in  1868  than  there  were  in 
1864;  nor  can  it  be  that  stationery  cost 
nearly  200  per  cent,  more  in  1868  than  in 
1864.  That  surely  is  not  the  case,  for,  if  I 
remember  correctly,  paper  of  all  kinds  was 
much  higher  in  1864,  when  it  cost  for  the  use 
of  the  House  only  $38,000,  than  it  was  in 
1868,  when  it  cost  $99,650.  The  difference  in 
the  cost  is  certainly  a matter  of  sufficient 
interest  to  inquire  into  with  some  care,  and 
were  it  not  for  the  fact  that  the  honorable 
members  of  Congress  have  so  many  other 
matters  of  more  weighty  importance  to  look 
after — such,  for  instance,  as  the  impeachment 
of  the  President;  the  regulating  the  powers 
and  duties  of  the  mayor  and  eity  council  of 
Washington  in  such  a way  as  to  be  sure  that 
the  appointing  power  is  always  in  the  hands 
of  loyal  men,  so  that  none  but  the  Simon 
Pure  shall  be  the  recipients  of  favors  in  the 
way  of  laboring  upon  the  streets  of  said  city 
a t public  expense  ; the  ojectiug  of  Miss  Ream 
trom  the  Capitol  on  account  of  her  holding 
opinions  adverse  to  the  majority  in  the 
House  npon  the  subject  of  impeachment  of 
the  President ; or  upon  the  more  important 
question  as  to  whether  Mr.  Woolley  did  ac- 
tually purchase  three  honorable  Senators  for 
the  President  with  that  $17,000  that  was 
found  in  some  old  safe,  after  the  President 
was  acquitted  of  the  charge  of  high  crime 
and  misdemeanor,  notwithstanding  the  hon- 
orable managers  sent  one  of  their  number  to 
the  realms  of  infinite  wisdom,  through  the 
hole  in  the  skies,  to  learn  wisdom  whereby 


they  might  convict  the  President,  (I  believe 
it  was  a failure,  after  all  that  trouble ;)  and 
various  and  sundry  other  most  important 
matters  to  claim  and  occupy  their  precious 
time — they  would,  I doubt  not,  take  vigo- 
rous steps  to  look  after  and  inquire  into  this 
trilling  difference  of  only  $61,050  in  the  cost 
of  paper  or  stationery  for  the  use  of  the 
House.  An  additional  reason  for  not  look- 
ing into  such  matters  is  perhaps  the  want 
of  time  and  adequate  compensation.  For  it 
will  be  borne  in  mind  that  their  salaries,  as 
fixed  by  law,  are  only  about  $8,000  per  an- 
num, at  twenty  cents  per  mile  for  traveling 
expenses  to  and  from  the  Capitol,  at  d only 
$5,000  and  the  mileage  paid  in  money,  the 
balance  in  trade,  such  as  books,  paper,  gold 
pens,  pocket  knives,  scissors,  gold  pencils, 
visiting  cards  of  the  latest  French  style,  and 
various  other  articles  too  tedious  to  mention  ; 
and  then  to  think  of  it  again,  their  time  is 
limited  to  only  twelve  months  in  the  year, 
and  they  are  elected  for  but  two  years  at  a 
time.  U nder  such  circumstances,  who  would 
be  so  unreasonable  as  to  expect  them  to  look 
after  such  small  matters  as  the  contingent 
expenses  of  the  House,  and  especially  so 
when  they  have  so  vigilaut,  conscientious, 
and  close-fisted  a Committee  on  Accounts  as 
the  present,  as  an  examination  ot  their  dis- 
bursements for  the  House  and  their  connec- 
tion with  it  will  abundantly  show  by  the 
time  we  get  through. 

It  will  be  seen  by  an  examination  of  table 
marked  “A”  that  the  House  expenses  for 
the  year  1865  increased  over  that  of  1864. . . $128,254 
Ditto  1866  “ “ “ 108,808 

Ditto  1867  “ “ “ ...  148,451 

Ditto  1868  “ “ “ ...  371,925 

Aggregate  increase  in  four  years $757,438 

while  the  average  increase  per  year  for  the 
last  four  years  is  $184,359.50 
The  increase  of  1868  over  that  of  1864,  is 
the  enormous  sum  of  $371,925,  or  double 
that  of  1864,  and  $16,295  over. 

There  are  many  very  interesting  facts  and 
items  connected  with  the  disbursements  of 
the  House  funds  for  the  years  1865,  1866  and 
1867,  but  the  limits  that  I have  prescribed 
for  the  examination  of  this  subject,  will  not 
permit  so  wide  a range.  I shall  therefore 
content  myself,  and  at  the  same  time  I trust 
that  the  demands  of  justics  will  be  amply 
met,  by  an  analysis  of  the  subject  for  the 
years  1864  and  1868,  and  particularly  1868. 

The  comparisons  that  have  already  been 
made  are  sufficient  to  show  the  most  profli- 
gate and  unjustifiable  waste  and  extrava- 
gant use,  or . rather  squandering  of  the 
people’s  money,  and  that  too,  in  many 
cases,  without  the  authority  of  law  or  even 
common  decency,  and  resting  solely  for*  a 
justification  upon  the  mere  acquiescence 
of  the  Committee  of  Accounts  for  their  le- 
gality, or  rather  npon  a custom  that  is 
both  vicious  and  dishonest,  that  has  been 
allowed  to  grow  up 'in  the  last  fewyeais 
in  matters  connected  with  the  business 


of  the  House,  until  its  proportions  have  be- 
come so  great,  and  its  capacity  for  swallow- 
ing the  people’s  money  so  wonderful,  that 
it  demands  almost  an  equal  share  of  the  con- 
tingent fund  with  the  legitimate  business  of 
the  House. 

I will  now  return  to  the  item  of  station- 
ery, and  endeavor  to  finish  that  subject 
without  further  digression. 

I will  now  introduce  Table  R to  the  atten- 
tion of  the  reader,  as  a continuation  of  the 
stationery  subject.  This  table  is  compiled 
from  House  Mis.  Doc.  No.  31,  2d  Session  40th 
Congress  (Clerk’s  Report) : 

TABLE  B. 

734  Gold  pens $2,908.89 

1,736  Gross  steel  pens 1,886.84 

152  Boxes  “ 165.65 

Quill  pens 124.70 

$6,086.08 

2,786  Penknives 5,620.00 

540  Pairs  scissors 601.00 

Total $11,287.08 

The  items  in  the  foregoing  table  are  in- 
cluded in  the  stationery  account  of  1808, 
and  my  object  in  presenting  them  in  this 
form  is  two-fold ; first,  to  let  the  public 
know  to  a certainty  that  which  has  been 
but  vague  rumor,  that  penknives,  gold  pens, 
&c.,  are  bought  with  the  public  money ; 
second,  to  sustain  what  I before  stated,  that 
this  financial  and  disbursing  committee  are 
remarkable  for  their  prudence  and  interest 
in  the  expenditure  of  the  people’s  money. 

I find,  upon  a close  examination  of  the 
document  referred  to,  that  eighty-six  of  the 
pocket  knives  were  purchased  expressly  for 
the  use  of  the  Clerk’s  office,  at  a cost  of 
$250.00,  some  of  them  costing  as  much  as 
$10.50  each  ; forty-six  pairs  of  scissors  were 
also  purchased  for  the  use  of  the  same  office 
at  a cost  of  about  $50.00 ; thirty-one  gold 
pens  were  appropriated  to  the  use  of  the 
Clerk’s  office  at  a cost  of  $165.00,  some  of 
them  costing  as  high  as  $18.50.  (See  page 
226  of  the  Doc.  relerred  to,  Clerk’s  report.) 
The  whole  amount  of  stationery  purchased 
would  be  equal  to  about  $520.00  to  each 
member  of  Congress.  But  it  will  be  said 
that  the  paper  used  for  book  folding  is  in- 
cluded in  the  bill ; that  is  true,  no  doubt ; 
but  will  any  sane  man  say  that  one  hundred 
dollars’  worth  of  wrapping  paper  would  not 
be  ample  to  wrap  all  the  books  that  one 
member  of  Congress  is  allowed.  I have  no 
doubt  that  forty  dollars’  worth  would  be 
quite  ample  for  that  purpose. 

That  being  the  case,  and  adding  the  $40 
to  the  stationery  allowed  by  law  to  each 
member,  would  make  the  stationery  allowed 
each  one  as  follows  : 


Stationery,  proper,  allowed $159.00 

Wrapping  paper 40.00 

Total $190.00 


Making  a total  amount  of  paper  for  use  of 
members,  $38,000  dollars,  leaving  $61,650  for 


other  purposes.  But  let  us  look  after  the 
seven  hundred  and  three  gold  pens  still  re- 
maining undisposed  of,  saying  nothing 
about  the  cart  load  of  steel  and  quill  pens 
on  hand. 

The  gold  pens  are  valued,  as  per  bill,  at 
$2,743.89,  or  about  $15.00  to  each  member. 
Is  it  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  members 
have  bought  all  this  $2,743  worth  of  pens  '? 

It  is  due  to  the  members  to  state  that  all 
the  stationery  that  they  draw  as  members 
is  charged  to  them — or  that  is  the  law ; and 
if  they  draw  more  than  is  allowed  them, 
they  are  required  to  pay  for  it.  The  two 
thousand  seven  hundred  penknives  still  re- 
maining must  also  be  accounted  for  ; their 
value,  as  per  bill,  is  $5,370.00. 

Let  us  see  what  disposition  we  can  make 
of  them.  The  value  of  the  knives  is  about 
$25.50  to  each  member.  If  they  were  equal- 
ly divided  among  them,  they  would  be  en- 
titled to  about  fifteen  knives  each.  I now 
propound  the  same  question  that  I did  in 
the  case  of  the  pens.  I do  not  suppose  any 
one  would  be  foolish  enough  to  even  think, 
much  less  say,  that  these  knives  were  bought 
by  the  members.  Upon  the  contrary,  I as- 
sert, without  the  fear  of  successful  contra- 
diction, that  not  even  one-half  of  the  knives, 
scissors  and  gold  pens  left,  after  the  Clerk’s 
office  was  supplied,  was  ever  drawn  by  mem- 
bers of  Congress,*  This  proposition  I shall 
prove  most  conclusively  by  such  evidence 
as  will  not  be  questioned  by  any  one.  The 
whole  cost  of  the  knives,  gold  pens  and 
scissors,  as  shown  in  Table  B,  is  $11,287  ; 
amount  used  by  Clerk’s  office,  $465  ; leaving 
$10,822  to  be  used  by  members,  or  accounted 
for  through  them.  By  an  examination  of 
the  Clerk’s  report,  it  will  be  seen  that  about 
$8,000  worth  of  stationery  proper,  was  all 
that  was  actually  drawn  by  them  ; the  bal- 
ance, about  $22,000,  to  make  up  the  $30,00^ 
to  which  they  were  entitled,  was  drawn  in 
money,  as  commutation  for  stationery  not 
actually  drawn  by  them. 

It  is  fair  to  presume,  that  the  members 
would,  on  an  average,  draw  at  least  thirty 
dollars’  worth  of  actual  writing  materials, 
such  as  paper,  envelopes,  &c.,  that,  in  the 
aggregate,  would  amount  to  $6,000,  there 
being  two  hundred  members,  including  the 
territorial  delegates.  It  will  be  seen  by  this 
calculation,  that  $2,000  is  all  that  could  be 
drawn  by  members,  unless  they  should  over- 
draw their  accounts,  a thing  that  is  never 
done,  or  at  least  the  Clerk’s  report,  in  which 
these  items  are  found,  gives  no  instance  of 
the  kind.  I think  the  proposition  that  the 
members  did  not  draw  those  articles,  is 
proven  by  the  foregoing  facts  beyond  cavil 
or  doubt. 

According  to  the  foregoing  calculations,  it 
will  be  seen  that  there  are  nearly  $62,000 
worth  of  stationery  left,  after  supplying  the 
folding  room,  and  the  amounts  allowed  by 
law  to  individual  members.  It  will  also  be 
kept  in  mind,  that  there  are  still  $3,822 


8 


worth  of  penknives,  gold  pens  and  scissors 
not  disposed  of,  nor  can  we  find  out  what 
has  become  of  them.  We  know,  from  the 
Clerk’s  report,  the  amount  drawn  by  the 
Postmaster,  who  is  the  agent  for  selling  and 
distributing  the  stationery  to  members ; but 
we  have  uo  report  of  what  the  Postmaster 
did  with  it.  It  may  be  said  that  a large 
amount  of  stationery,  including  gold  pens, 
&c.,  was  left  to  run  over  for  another  year. 
That,  I undertake  to  say,  is  not  the  case, 
for,  in  looking  over  the  reports  of  former 
years  in  respect  to  the  contingent  expenses 
of  the  House,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  samfe 
shameful  and  extravagant  purchases  are 
made  each  year.  For  the  year  ending  J une, 
1867,  the  stationery  account  was  even  more 
scandalous  than  in  1868.  The  stationery 
that  year,  1867,  was  : 


Stationery  purchased,  about $85,000.00 

Commutation  of  stationery 20,000.00 

Total $105,000.00 


and  the  purchases  of  penknives,  gold  pens, 
scissors,  &c.,  were  as  extravagant  in  1867  as 
in  1868.  There  were  none  of  those  articles 
left  over  in  1867,  I am  authorized  by  the 
facts  to  say  ; for  if  there  had  been  a supply 
left  over,  the  purchases  for  1868  would  not 
have  been  made. 

I therefore  conclude,  and  I think  for  the 
best  of  reasons,  that  the  supplies  purchased 
for  each  year  are  always  exhausted,  and  an 
examination  of  the  Clerk’s  reports  for  the 
last  six  years  will  demonstrate  that  fact  be- 
yond question  ; for  each  year’s  purchase  ex- 
hibits the  same  profligate  extravagance.  It 
may  be  said,  however,  that  the  supplies  to 
committees  of  the  House  have  exhausted  or 
used  up  the  $61,000  worth  of  stationery,  in- 
cluding the  penknives,  gold  pens,  scissors, 
Ac.  I should  very  much  regret  to  know 
\hat  to  be  true,  for  it  would  place  the  hon- 
orable members  of  committees  in  the  most 
unenviable  position  before  the  public  in 
which  it  would  be  possible  to  place  any  hon- 
orable man.  If  it  be  true,  however,  that 
this  vast  amount  of  stationery,  including 
gold  pens,  &c.,  has  been  drawn  by  the  com- 
mittees, the  public  ought  to  know  it,  and  to 
know  the  fact  would  most  certainly  bring 
down  upon  them  the  just  and  merited  in- 
dignation of  an  outraged  people ; for  such 
an  act  upon  the  part  of  committees  would  be 
nothing  short  of  robbery,  and  the  pirate  up- 
on the  high  seas  or  the  highwayman  would 
become,  comparatively  speaking,  respecta- 
ble beside  them.  I do  not  believe  that  the 
committees  are  guilty  of  any  such  thing. 
It  is  true,  however,  that  the  committees  are 
entitled  to  and  do  draw  all  the  stationery 
they  need  for  the  purpose  of  transacting  the 
public  business,  and  it  sometimes  happens 
that  great  abuses  occur,  unknown  to  the 
members ; but  that  an  amount  of  stationery 
exceeding  by  $23,000  the  entire  amount  used 
by  the  House  for  the  year  1864,  was  used  by 


the  committees,  is  too  startling  to  be  enter 
tained  for  one  moment.  But  what  becomes 
of  this  vast  amount  of  stationery  is  a ques- 
tion that  ought,  in  justice  to  the  people,  to 
be  inquired  after,  fn  connection  with  other 
expenditures  even  more  startling  and  un- 
justifiable, as  I shall  be  able  to  show  before 
I am  through  with  the  subject  under  consid- 
eration. I shall,  for  the  present,  dismiss  the 
item  of  stationery,  as  I will  have  occasion 
to  refer  to  it  again,  in  connection  with  other 
items. 

The  next  item  that  I propose  to  examine 
is  the  expenditure  connected  with  the  office 
of  Sergeant-at-Arms,  N.  G.  Ordway,  officer. 
As  a starting  point  in  this  branch  of  my  in- 
quiries, I append  the  following  exhibit : 

Amounts  received  by  Ar.  G.  Ordway,  Sergeant-at- 

Arms , as  per  Cleric's  Report,  January  1, 1868, 

(26  Mis.  Doc.  No.  31,2 d Sess.  40 th  Congress .) 


PAGE  « 

14  Committee  on  Public  Expenditures. . . $700.80 

21  Do  New  Orleans  riots 1,987.12 

34  Do  Internal  revenue  frauds  1,161.93 

43  Item 100.00 

47  Committee  on  Euneral  of  P.  Johnson.  2,144.65 

47  & 48  Do  Southern  railroads.... . 1,763.00 

50  Do  Judiciary 1,620.00 

51  Do  Indian  Affairs 712.80 

52  Eor  arrests  on  call  of 

House 577.20 

52  Case  of  assault  on  W. 

. H.  Painter 263.21 

52  Case  of  C.  V.  Culver. . . 240.10 

52  Crape  in  case  of  death 

of  Grider 200.40 

53  Committee  on  Naval  Affairs 133.00 

53  Horse-car  tickets 56.84 

53  Cash  paid  Whaley 50.0Q 

53  Summoning  witnesses.  24.20 

53  Committee  on  Naval  Affairs 359.85 

59  Do  New  Orleans  riots 2,392.40 

60  Do  Public  Expenditures. ..  2.192.60 

141  & 142  Do  Judiciary 3,773.80 

143  Do  Judiciary 110.00 

143  Do  Judiciary 264.00 

189  & 190  Do  * Judiciary 1,236.90 

191  & 192  Do  Pay  Department 1,096.80 

192,  3 & 4 Do  Prisoners  of  war 1,955.00 

195  & 196  Do  Elections  1,233  23 

196  & 197  Do  Pay  Department 371.81 

198  Do  Judiciary 244.40 

Horse  and  carriage  and 
' street  railroad  tick- 
ets for  the  year  end- 
ing January,  1868..  916.84 

195  Committee  on  Pay  Department 365.25 

Salaries  for  Sergeant-at- 
Arms,  Clerk  and  As- 
sistant   6,912.00 

Estimated  temporary 

assistants 3,000.00 


$38,169.13 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  foregoiug  exhibit 
is  prepared  in  the  same  order  that  the  sev- 
eral charges  appear  in  the  document  refer- 
red to  ; my  object  in  this  is  to  facilitate  an 
examination  of  the  items,  if  any  one  should 
have  the  curiosity  to  do  so.  In  the  analyz- 
ing process  to  which  I propose  to  subject 
the  several  items  in  the  exhibit,  as  well  as 
the  expenditures  of  the  committees,  I shall 
have  frequent  occasion  to  refer  to  them. 

The  following  bill  of  expenditures  may  be 


9 


found  on  page  14  of  the  Clerk’s  report  I 
give  also  the  charges  of  all  connected  with 
the  committees  u{>on  this  occasion,  except 
witnesses. 


N.  G.  ORDWAY — Travel  from  'Washington 
to  Boston  and  return  with  documents 
for  Committee  on  Public  Expenditures, 

960  miles $96.40 

Board,  in  September  and  October,  1866, 

with  committee 222.00 

4 travels  from  Warner,  N.  H.,  to  Boston, 

450  miles 45.00 

2 travels  from  Holderness,  hi.  H.,  to  New 

York,  550  miles 55.00 

Paid  for  rooms  to  take  testimony 93.00 

Paid  for  stationery 69.50 

Paid  for  hack-hire 24.25 

Paid  for  telegrams 75.06 

Paid  for  procuring  testimony 21.00 


$700.81 


C.  T.  HFBBUBD — Board  and  expenses  as 
chairman  of  Committee  pn  Public  Ex- 
penditures during  recess  of  39th  Con- 
gress, 43  days  at  Boston  and  New  York  258.00 
4 travels  from  Boston  to  Brashear  Palls, 

N.  Y.,  1,480  miles 148.00 

3 travels  from  Brashear  Falls,  N.  Y.,  to 

New  York  city,  1,200  miles 120.00 

1 travel  from  Boston  to  New  York,  240 
miles 24.00 


$550.00 

E.  H.  BOBBINS — Board  and  expenses  as 
member  of  Committee  on  Public  Ex- 
penditures during  recess  of  39th  Con- 


gress, 29  days,  at  $6 174.00 

4 travels  from  Concord,  N.  H.,  to  Boston, 

450  miles 45.00 

5 days’  expenses  examining  testimony..  30.00 


$249.00 

H.  G.  HAYES — Board  and  expenses  in  Bos-  * 
ton  and  New  York  as  stenographer  for 

/ hi.'  n TA- 1 


Committee  on  Public  Expenditures,  19 

days,  at  $6 114.00 

2 travels  from  New  York  to  Boston  and 
return,  944  miles 94.20 


cessarily  and  actually  traveled  in  executing 
any  process  of  the  House.  If  the  law  means 
anything,  it  means  that  the  officer  shall  re- 
ceive no  more  pay  than  for  the  distance  ne- 
cessarily and  actually  traveled.  No  one,  I pre- 
sume, will  he  foolish  enough  to  suppose  even 
that  the  Sergeant  at-Arms  traveled  23,160 
miles  actual  and  necessary  travel,  in  connec- 
tion with  his  duties  for  the  committee  upon 
that  occasion.  And  for  the  purpose  of  com- 
prehending more  readily  the  vastness  of  the 
distance,  we  will  call  it  trip  No.  1 around  the 
globe ; and  as  there  will  be  quite  a number 
of  such  trips  developing  themselves  during 
this  inquiry,  I desire  that  No.  1 be  kept  in 
mind.  The  board  bill  for  Mr.  Ordway  is  not 
set  out  definitely,  but  I think,  from  the  char- 
acter of  the  charges  for  board,  that  his  bill 
would  be,  for  thirty  days,  $180.  I think  the 
charge  for  board  in  his  account  justifies  that 
conclusion.  The  account,  then,  stands  thus : 


For  mileage $2,316 

Board  thirty  days,  at  $6 180 

Total $2,496 


This  charge  bears  upon  its  face  the  evi- 
dence of  fraud  most  base ; but  as  it  is,  per- 
haps, the  most  decent  and  respectable  of  any 
of  his  charges,  I will  refrain  from  making 
further  comment  until  his  whole  record  is 
placed  before  us,  except  such  as  may  inci- 
dentally arise  during  the  presentation  of  the 
fact.  When  that  is  done,  however,  I will 
endeavor  to  show  the  vile  dishonesty  and 
the  outrageous  swindling  that  runs  through 
his  whole  batch  of  charges,  and  give  my 
opinion  as  to  where  the  responsibility  rests. 

The  next  in  order  is  the  New  Orleans  riot 
committee.  (See  page  21,  same  Doc.) 


$208.40 

F.  H.  SMITH — Board  and  expenses  in  Bos- 
ton as  reporter  for  Committee  on  Pub- 
lic Expenditures,  14  days,  at  $6 84.00  \ 

Travel  from  Washington  to  Boston  and 
return,  942  miles 94.40 

$184.40 

On  page  60  I find  the  following  charges 
(omiting  the  names)  for  services  for  the 
Committee  on  Public  Expenditures : 

N.  G.  ORDWAY — Summoning  witnesses.. .$2,192.60 

The  number  of  witnesses  summoned  upon 
this  occasion  was  36,  for  which  he  was  enti- 
tled to  $2  for  each  witness.  Serving  the  36 
would  be  $72.  Deducting  the  $72  will  leave 
$2,120.60.  This  amount  was  received  by 
Ordway  for  mileage.  The  charge  would  in- 
dicate that  he  had  traveled  21,206  miles.  By 
looking  at  the  first  charge,  however,  we  find 
that  he  is  paid  1,960  miles  more,  making  in 
all  23,166  miles. 

I have  always  understood  that  when  pub- 
lic officers  were  allowed  mileage,  it  was  to 
cover  all  personal  expenses.  And  the  law  in 
regard  to  the  duties  of  the  Sergeant-at-Arms 
of  the  House  provides  that  that  officer  shall 
receive  ten  cents  per  mile  for  each  mile  ne- 


THOS.  B.  CHENEY — Expenses  on  trip  with 
Select  Committee  on  Affairs  in  Bouisi- 
ana  and  New  Orleans  Biots : 

Expenses  from  Washington  to  New  Or- 
leans and  return... 

Hack-hire,  carriages,  etc 

Telegrams 

Stationery 

Parlors  and  other  expenses  at  St.  Eouis 
Hotel,  used  by  committee  for  examin- 
ing witnesses 

J.  F.  Mollers,  services  as  detective 

3,159  miles’  Havel  from  Washington  to 

New  Orleans  and  return 

Board  and  expenses,  16  days,  at  $8 


$555.15 

266.00 

128.79 

53.98 


434.40 

105.00 

315.90 

128.00 


$1,987.12 


In  this  case  Mr.  Cheney  is  acting  Deputy 
Sergeant-  at- Arm  s. 

On  page  59  the  following  additional  charge 
appears,  in  connection  with  this  committee, 
the  names  of  witnesses  omitted.  N.  G.  Ord- 
way, summoning  witnesses,  $2,392.40.  Num- 
ber of  witnesses  summoned  in  this  cas§,  300, 
for  which  he  is  entitled  to  $600  for  service, 
without  mileage ; deduct  the  $600,  will  leave 
17,924  miles  as  having  been  traveled  in 
summoning  the  witnesses;  add  to  this  3,159 
miles  for  travel  from  Washington  to  New 
Orleans  and  return,  the  account  will  stand 
as  follows,  to  wit : 


10 


Summoning  witnesses $2,392.40 

Sixteen  days’  board,  at  $8 128.00 

Mileage  going  and  returning 315.90 

One-fifth  of  $555.15 111.03 

Total : $2,947.33 


The  same  scandalous  charge  in  relation  to 
mileage  occurs  in  this  case,  as  in  the  first, 
making  trip  No.  2 around  the  globe.  There 
is  lack  of  distance  in  this  case,  but  in  others, 
as  will  be  seen,  he  has  quite  a lap-over  in 
the  traval;  for  convenience,  therefore,  we 
give  him  the  lap-over  in  these  cases,  so  that 
no  injustice  will  be  done  the  honorable  Ser- 
geant-at-Arms. 

There  is  a feature  in  this  case  that  does 
not  appear  in  the  first,  which  is  this : “ Ex- 
penses from  Washington  to  New  Orleans  and 
return,  $555.15.”  This  charge  is  most  re- 
markable, when  we  examine  all  the  charges 
connected  with  this  committee.  For  what 
was  this  $555.15  paid  ^ The  members  of  the 
committee  charge  mileage,  and  board  at  $8 
per  day;  so  do  the  clerks  and  every  other 
person  connected  with  the  trip,  except,  per- 
haps, one  messenger,  whose  name  does  not 
appear  in  the  case. 

I find  that  any  extended  notice  in  each 
case  would  occupy  too  much  space  and  tire 
the  patience  of  the  reader.  I shall,  there- 
fore, give  the  cases  with  but  little  comment, 
until  they  are  all  presented. 

The  next  case  in  order  is  the  following, 
found  on  page  34  Clerk’s  report : 

H.  G-.  ORD  WAY— Expenses  on  account  of 
Committee  on  Frauds  in  Internal  Rev- 
enue, December,  1866,  and  January, 

1867 : 

Parlors  and  rooms  used  for  examining 
witnesses  at  Astor  House,  Hew  York  $342.75 


Parlors,  rooms,  etc.,  at  Continental  Hotel, 

Philadelphia 104.75 

Stationery  62.85 

A.  McCloud,  for  copy  of  record 20.00 

Carriage-hire,  car-fare,  etc 219.94 

Telegrams,  etc 27.14 

Two  trips,  Washington  to  Hew  York  and 

return,  940  miles’  travel 94.00 

One  trip,  Washington  to  Philadelphia 

and  return,  280  miles’  travel 28.00 

Twenty-nine  days’  board,  at  $6  per  day. . 174.00 

Seven  days’  board  for  Hemple  in  Phila- 
delphia  31.50 

One  trip  to  Hew  York  and  return,  470 

miles’  travel * 47.00 


$1,151.93 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  item  of  board  is 
still  prominent  in  this  case,  reduced  in  price, 
however,  $2  per  day. 

The  next  case  is  the  charges  of  Mr.  Ord- 
way,  in  connection  with  the  Judiciary  Com- 
mittee : 


PAGES. 

48,  49,  Summoning  witnesses $1,620.00 

141,  142,  Summoning  witnesses 3,773.80 

143,  o Travel  for  committee 206.00 

143,  28  days’  board,  at  $6 168.00 

189,  190,  191,  Summoning  witnesses 1,236.90 

198,  By  Department  travel 94.40 

25  days’  board,  at  $6 150.00 


$7,249.10 

In  this  case  there  were  220  witnesses  sum- 


moned, which  would  be,  for  service,  $440. 
The  account  stands  as  follows  : 


Mileage,  64,911  miles $6,491.19 

Serving  process 440.00 

53  days’  board 318.00 


$7,249.10 

This  case  requires  no  comment.  It  stands 
out  in  such  bold  relief  that  he  who  runs  can 
but  read. 

Where  is  thy  shame,  O man ! Thitikst  thou 
not  that  a day  of  reckoning  will  come  h Will 
the  people,  the  toiling  millions  of  this  coun- 
try, still  sleep  and  permit  such  outrages  as 
this  to  continue  ? Although  a profligate  Con- 
gress may  give  to  such  charges  the  semblance 
of  legality,  in  order  to  prevent  a conviction 
for  robbery  or  theft  before  the  courts  of 
justice,  the  people  will  arraign  the  perpetra- 
tors of  all  such  acts,  and  the  Congress  that 
allows  them,  before  the  bar  of  public  justice, 
from  which  there  is  no  appeal,  and  the  terri- 
ble sentence  of  an  outraged  and  incensed 
people  will  sweep  from  place  and  power  all 
who  have  thus  proved  themselves  unworthy 
of  the  sacred  trust  confided  to  them  by  an 
honest  and  industrious  constituency. 

The  mileage  in  this  case  is  most  astound- 
ing. Think  of  it,  reader;  64,911  miles — a 
distance  almost  equal  to  three  times  around 
the  globe!  We  shall,  therefore,  call  this 
stupendous  travel  “ Trip  No.  3,  4 and  5 
around  the  globe.”  Does  any  body  believe 
the  distance  charged  for  in  this  case  was 
actually  traveled  3 I leave  the  answer  for 
the  reader.  I must  leave  this  case  for  the 
present. 

As  an  examination  in  detail  of  each  case 
in  Mr.  Ordway’s  account  would  not  only  oc- 
cupy more  space  than  the  limits  of  this  work 
would  permit,  and  the  reader  would  become 
wearied  in  perusing  it,  I shall  give  but  a few 
more  at  length.  I will  recapitulate  the 
mileage,  in  order  that  the  reader  may  see,  at 
a glance,  the  enormity  of  that  branch  of  the 
gentleman’s  service : 

MILES. 

Committee  on  Public  Expenditures 23,160 

Committee  on  Hew  Orleans  Riot 21,083 

Committee  on  Revenue  Frauds 1,690 

Funeral  of  Hon.  P.  Johnson 1,859 

Committee  on  Southern  Railroads 17,179 

Committee  on  Indian  Affairs 6,268 

On  call  of  the  House 222 

Case  of  Painter  Culver 2,559 

Several  cases 1,500 

Committee  on  Judiciary 64,911 

Committee  on  Prisoners  of  War 19,000 

Committee  on  Pay  Department 12,000 

Estimated  traveling,  not  included  above,  by 

assistants 17‘000 

Total  miles  traveled - 208,403 

The  foregoing  table  is  believed  to  be  as 
near  correct  as  it  is  possible  to  ascertain  from 
the  report.  The  last  item  is  estimated,  but 
believed  to  be  true ; the  others  are  correct, 
as  they  were  taken  from  the  charges  them- 
selves" Any  one  who  may  wish,  can  make 
the  calculations  for  themselves. 

In  order  to  fully  comprehend  the  vast  dis- 


11 


tance  charged  as  having  been  traveled  by  the 
Sergeant- at- Arms  and  his  assistants,  in  con- 
nection with  their  official  duties,  I shall 
make  a comparison  with  the  circumference 
of  the  earth  or  globe  as  to  distance.  The 
earth  is  said  to  be  24,000  miles  in  circumfer- 
ence. The  distance  traveled,  as  charged  for, 
would  be  equal  to  eight  trips  around  the 
earth  and  16,403  miles,  or  two-thirds  of  the 
way  on  the  ninth  trip.  It  would  be  an  in- 
sult to  an  intelligent  public  to  ask  any  one 
to  believe  that  this  immense  distance  was 
traveled  by  Mr.  Ordway  and  his  assistants 
in  connection  with  their  official  duties.  I 
have  no  idea  that  one-third  of  the  distanee 
was  actually  and  necessarily  traveled. 

In  addition  to  this  unmitigated  swindle 
in  regard  to  this  mileage  charge,  this  same 
man  has  the  audacity,  impudence,  and  har- 
dihood to  present  board  bills  in  amount  to 
over  $2,000 ; and  by  reference  to  the  bills  it 
will  be  seen  that  $6  per  day  is  charged  in 
every  case  but  one,  the  New  Orleans  riot, 
in  which  case  he  charges  $8,  and  from  the 
character  of  the  charges  in  that  case,  I have 
no  doubt  but  his  car  fare  was  paid  out  of 
the  public  money  tilso. 

The  question  naturally  arises  by  whom 
are  those  scandalous,  swindling  accounts 
allowed  % I will  state  now  that  all  such  ac- 
counts are  made  out  by  the  officer  to  whom 
they  are  due,  and  are  by  him  then  presented 
to  the  Committee  of  Accounts,  where  they 
receive  tbe  finishing  touch,  that  entitles  the 
holder  to  draw  the  money.  As  I shall  have 
occasion  in  a separate  chapter,  to  show 
where  the  responsibility  rests,  I will  leave 
that  question  for  the  present. 

The  next  case  I^sliail  present  is  more  vil- 
lainous, if  possible,  than  any  that  have  pre- 
ceded it.  I most  especially  iuvite  the  atten- 
tion of  members  of  Congress  to  this  charge, 
as  I regard  it  good  for  both  instruction  and 
reproof. 

X.  G.  ORDWAY. — Fees  and  expenses  in  ar- 
resting, bringing  before  the  House,  and 
discharging  the  following  named  mem- 
bers of  Congress  for  being  absent  with- 
out leave  : G.  W.  Anderson,  A.  A.  Bar- 
ber, J.  F.  Benjamin,  H.  P.  H.  Bromwell, 

J.  W.  Chambers,  J.  H.  Defrees,  B.  Eg- 
gleston, E.  Hise,  A.  J.  Kuykendall,  H. 
Maynard,  J.  S.  Morrill,  J.  W.  Patter- 
son" F.  A.  Pike,  A.  H.  Bice,  L.  H.  Rous- 
seau, T.  H.  Stillwell,  A.  Thornton,  H.  D. 
Washburn,  Wm.  Windom,  S.  T.  Holmes, 

J.  A.  Kasson,  S.  S.  Marshall,  E.  B.  V. 
Wright,  J.  A.  Bingham,  J.  F.  Farns- 
worth, E.  C.  Ingersoll,  C.  H.  Winfield, 

J.  G.  Blaine,  J.  w.  Chanler,  B.  Hart,  J. 

M.  Marvin,  S.  McKee.  T.  M.  Pomeroy, 

H.  WardAWm.  B.  Stokes,  L.  Rousseau, 
William  D.  Kelley,  Samuel  McKee,  Por- 
tus  Baxter,  J.  Bidwell,  B.  P.  Buckland, 

II.  L.  Dawes,  C.  Delano,  C.  Goodyear,  J. 

B.  Kubbell,  G.  B.  Latham,  H.  McCul- 
lough. S.  W.  Moulton,  S.  Perham,  T.  A. 

Plants,  J.  H.  Rice  C.  Sitgreaves,  Wm. 

B.  Stokes,  H.  Ward,  William  B Wash- 
burn, J.  M.  Ashley,  S.  Hooper,  G.  V. 
Lawrence,  I.  C.  Sloan,  F.  E.Woodbridge, 

A.  Brandagee,  J.  A.  Griswold,  William 
Radford,  G.  W.  Anderson,  H.  P.  H. 
Bromwell,  H.  L.  Dawes,  J.  B.  Hubbell, 


H.  Maynard,  J.  K.  Moorhead,  S.  F.  Wil- 
son, A.  Thornton,  T.  M.  Stillwell,  L.  W. 

Boss,  J.  W.  Patterson,  J.  D.  Baldwin,  F. 

C.  Beaman,  J.  G.  Blaine,  H.  S.  Bundy, 

J.  L.  Dawson,  E.  B.  Eckley  B.  Hart, 
William  D.  Kelley,  J.  M.  Marvin,  J.  K. 
Morehead,  G.  S.  Orth,  C.  E.  Phelps,  T. 

M.  Pomeroy,  L.  W.  Boss,  J.  F.  Starr,  J. 

L.  Thomas,  jr.,  S.  L.  Warner,  S.  F.  Wil- 
son, T.  T.  Davis,  E.  1ST.  Hubbell,  B.  F. 

Loan,  A.  H.  Ward,  J.  Wentworth,  H.C. 
Demifcg,  R.  S.  Hale,  H.  J.  Raymond,  J. 

D.  Baldwin,  H.  S.  Bundy,  J.  H.  Defrees, 

G.  B.  Latham,  H.  McCullough,  C.  E. 
Phelps,  W.  B.  Washburn,  J.  L.  Thomas, 
jr.,  C.  Sitgreaves,  E.  C.  Ingersoll,  F.  A. 

Pike,  at  $5.20  each $577  20 

1 am  informed  that  the  call  of  the  House 
that  brought  this  bill  intd  existence,  occur- 
red near  the  close  of  the  Thirty-Ninth  Con- 
gress. I insert  the  entire  bill, .including  the 
names,  in  order  that  no  honorable  member 
of  Congress  shall  have  the  least  cause  to 
complain  of  me  for  not  giving  him  ample 
justice  in  the  premises,  as  each  of  them  are, 
to  some  extent,  interested  in  the  case.  The 
twenty  cents  charge  in  the  bill  is  for  mile- 
age. Upon  a close  examination,  it  will  be 
seen  that  that  model  and  modest  traveler, 
Mr.  Ordway,  charges  and  receives  for  his 
services  upon  that  occasion,  the  very  mod- 
est sum  of  $577.20.  In  addition  to  the  arrest 
and  discharge  of  the  honorable  members,  he 
charges  for  traveling  222  miles. 

The  whole  distance  traveled  by  every  one 
connected  with  the  arrests  did  not  exceed 
five  miles,  and  that  was  done  by  doorkeep- 
ers, who  received  no  additional  pay  for  their 
services.  But  this  man  Ordway,  the  cele- 
brated traveler,  who  gets  $5  each  for  arrest- 
ing the  members  of  Congress,  and  who,  it 
is  said,  never  went  out  of  the  Capitol,  pre- 
sents his  modest  little  claim  to  the  Commit- 
tee on  Accounts,  who  scanned  it  with  the 
care  peculiar  to  them  in  such  matters,  and 
who  being  satisfied  that  the  Sergeant-at- 
Arms  ought  to  be  well  paid  for  his  arduous 
labor  in  that  long  and  dreary  night,  with 
one  accord  agreed  that  he  did  actually  trav- 
el two  hundred  and  twenty-two  miles,  and 
ordered  the  disbursing  officer  to  pay  the  ac- 
count ; and  the  traveler  shouted,  Amen  ! 

The  following  bill  is  one  of  the  most  aston- 
ishing instances  of  extravagance  and  folly 
that  can  be  found  anywhere  in  this  country. 
It  is  exceedingly  difficult  to  determine  where 
the  responsibility  rests  for  the  extravagance 
in  this  case. 

N.  G.ORDWAY. — Expenses  incurred 
on  account  of  tbe  death  and  burial 
of  Hon.  Philip  Johnson,  late  a 
member  of  the  House  of  Represen- 
tatives, thirty-ninth  Congress : 

Hack  hire,  assistance  in  care  of  re- 
mains, and  arranging  for  the  fu- 
neral in  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives   - $50  00 

18  white  silk  sashes  for  officers  of 

House  and  Senate 254  00 

8 blacK  silk  sashes  for  Committee  of 

Arrangement 96  00 

201  doz.  kid  gloves 615  00 

2 doz.  kid  gloves 54  00 

2 doz.  kid  gloves 60  00 


12 


1 doz.  kid  gloves $33  00 

200  black  crape  scarfs 300  00 

Travel  of  messenger  to  Hew  York 

and  return 47  00 

Hacks  to  carry  escort  and  friends  to 

depot 16  00 

Fare  and  expenses  of  escort  and  re- 
mains from  Washington,  D.  C.,  to 

Easton,  Pa 245  00 

Hotel  bills  and  hacks  at  Easton 42  65 

Pare  and  expenses  on  return  to 

Washington 194  00 

Travel  of  Asst.  Sergeant-at-Arms 
and  two  messengers,  Washington 
to  Easton  and  return,  460  miles 
each 138  00 


L.  WILLIAMS. — Services  and  expen- 
ses as  undertaker  in  care  of  re- 
mains of  Philip  Johnson : 


Case,  plate  and  engraving 16  00 

Laying  out,  &c 15  00 

Crape  ahd  gloves 20  00 

Opening  vault  and  attendance  on 

funeral  day 1150 

Hearse  10  00 

4 hacks 32  00 

6 hacks 42  00 

2 hacks 16  00 

2 hacks 1 14  00 

5 hacks 15  00 

2 hacks 14  00 

Removing  remains  from  vault  to  de- 
pot  20  00 

Attendance  with  remains  to  Easton, 

Penn.,  and  return 30  00 


2, 


WILLIAM  KEYS,  furnishing  70  hacks. 


144  65 


405  50 
420  00 


Total $2,970  15 

We  can  see  in  this,  as  in  all  other  cases 
where  Ordway  has  any  hand  in  it,  that  ever- 
lasting mania  for  mileage.  It  would  seem 
that  a case  with  all  the  solemn  surroundings 
of  this,  and  an  extravagance  unheard  of  be- 
fore, should  have  softened  his  feeling  some- 
what upon  the  question  of  filching  money 
from  the  Treasury ; hut  not  so  upon  this 
occasion,  for  we  see  about  $500  charged  as 
expenses  going  to  Easton  and  returning  to 
Washington  ; and  I have  no  doubt  that  this 
charge  covered  all  the  expense  of  every  per- 
son in  any  way  connected  with  the  escort ; 
yet  our  eyes  are  saluted  with  that  same 
charge  for  mileage  that  has  been  such  a 
fruitful  source  of  swindling  and  fraud  in 
almost  every  case  where  Mr.  Ordway  has 
had  to  do. 

In  addition  to  all  these  villainous  charges, 
Mr.  Ordway  receives  an  annual  salary  of 
$2,592,  and  all  of  his  assistants  are  receiving 
salaries  from  $1,440  to  $>2,1(50.  This  fact 
should  he  borne  in  mind  in  connection  with 
the  record  in  his  case. 

There  are  many  things  of  interest  still 
remaining  in  the  charges  against  the  Ser- 
geant-at-Arms, to  which  I would  very  much 
like  to  call  attention,  but  on  account  of  so 
many  other  matters  upon  the  subject  under 
consideration  that  have  not  been  even  allud 
ed  to  as  yet,  I will  be  compelled  to  drop  Mr. 
Ordway  at  this  point. 

I now  turn  my  attention  to  another  branch 
of  the  inquiry,  and  I must  say,  in  the  out- 
set, that  this  will  exhibit,  if  possible,  a more 


damnable  and  outrageous  state  of  things4* 
than  either  of  the  preceding  inquiries.  My 
subject  will  be  carriage  and  horse-hire,  cart- 
age, &c. 

For  the  purpose  of  showing  the  enormous 
increase  of  the  House  expenses,  I will  give 
the  entire  cost  of  the  service  under  consid- 
eration for  the  years  ending  June  30,  1804, 
and  June,  1868,  in  order  that  the  outrageous 
character  of  the  expenditures  of  1868  may 
be  the  more  forcibly  presented  to  the  mind  : 

Horse  and  carriage  hire  and  cartage,  1868.. $14, 213  00 

^ ^ A ^ 1 . 4 ^ ^ 1 OC  A n K(\A 


Horse  and  carriage  hire  and  cartage,  1864..  6,594  CO 
Excess  1868  over  1864 $7,619  00 


We  will  try  now  to  inquire  into  the  cause 
of  this  great  increase.  It  cannot  arise  from 
an  increased  necessity,  for  there  was  no  more 
business  connected  with  this  branch  of  the 
service  in  1868  than  there  was  in  1864.  We 
will  compare  a few  items  in  this  matter,  and 
see  the  difference.  Take  the  item  of  haul- 
ing documents  for  the  two  years  : 

1$68  there  were 12,389  loads,  at  50  cents.  $6,194  50 

1864  there  were 3,106  loads,  at  50  cents.  1,553  00 

Excess  of  1868...  9,283  $4,641  50 

It  will  be  seen  that  in  this  item  alone, 
1868  is  more  than  four  times  greater  than 
1864,  both  in  number  of  loads  and  cost  to 
the  Government.  This  difference  is  so  glar- 
ingly outrageous  and  unjustifiable,  that  no 
one,  I presume,  will  undertake  to  defend  it. 
There  were  no  more  documents  in  1868  than 
in  1864.  Then  why  so  great  a difference  in 
number  of  loads  and  the  cost  to  the  Govern- 
ment— the  increase  being  more  than  300  per 
cent  ? The  question  is  easily  solved,  as  in 
all  other  cases  of  such  increase  of  similar 
items.  It  is  simply  an  unmitigated  swindle, 
not  possessing  a single  element  of  honesty 
or  fair  dealing.  And  the  officer  who  certi- 
fies to  or  approves  such  claims,  and  the 
committee  who  allows  them,  and  the  Con- 
gress that  makes  the  appropriations  to  pay 
them,  are  all  alike  guilty  of  a willful  or  ig- 
norant disregard  of  the  interests  committed 
to  their  care.  If  it  be  willful,  they  disgrace 
the  positions  they  hold.  If  it  be  ignorance, 
they  are  unfit  for  the  positions  they  occupy, 
and  the  sooner  they  are  required  to  surren- 
der the  places  they  fill,  the  better  it  will  be 
for  the  country.  It  matters  not  which  horn 
of  the  dilemma  they  take.  Either  will  place 
them  in  a position  unfit  to  be  intrusted  with 
public  affairs. 

This  is  only  one  item  in  this  branch  of 
this  subject.  The  next  item  to  which  I in- 
vite attention  is,  if  possible,  Aore  scandal- 
ous than  the  one  just  examined. 

The  following  is  the  bill  for  private  horses 
and  carriages  for  1868.  (See  Clerk’s  Re- 
port :) 


H.  G-.  Ordway $916  84 

Ed.  Spicer 1,098  00 

Ira  Goodnow 515  00 

Clinton  Lloyd 2,523  00 


Total $5,152  84 


13 


For  1864 : 

Robert  Morris. $900  00 

Ira  Goodnow - 1,4912a 

E.  Etheridge 14  00 

C.  Loyd  . . 60  00 

Total $2,465  25 

Excess  of  1868  over  1864 $2,687  59 

I ain  sure  that  the  hill  for  1864  is  much 
larger  than  it  should  have  been,  and  espe- 
cially the  Doorkeeper’s  (Goodnow.)  The 
Sergeant-at-Arms,  Mr.  Ball,  had  not  received 
the  inspiration  that  has  filled  our  man  Ord- 
way  so  unutterably  full,  that  it  seems  he  is 
unable  to  comprehend  anything  except  it 
has  connected  with  it  mileage,  board,  or 
horse  and  carriage-hire.  Mr.  Ball  paid  for 
his  carriage  riding  with  his  own  money,  as 
all  honest  men  would  do  under  like  circum- 
stances. There  was  some  reason  and  pro- 
priety in  regard  to  this  carriage-hire  before 
the  days  of  street  railroads,  but  now  all  this 
whole  bill  is  a huge  swindle,  and  ought  to 
be  stopped  at  once.  None  of  the  document 
hauling  for  the  Clerk’s  office  is  included  in 
• this  bill  for  1868.  The  whole  bill  is  an  out- 
rage upon  public  decency,  as  I think  I will 
be  able  to  show. 

Let  us  examine  this  bill  of  Clinton  Lloyd. 
I will  also  carry  Spicer’s  charge  along  with 
it : 

C.  LLOYD. — Use  of  3 horses  and  carriages 


for  Clerk’s  office,  October,  1867 $232  50 

E.  SPICER. — Use  of  1 horse  and 

wagon  for  October,  1867 $77  50 

Use  of  1 saddle-horse  for  October, 

1867 62  00 

$139  50 


It  is  very  strange  that  three  carriages  and 
horses  appear  upon  the  record  as  the  prop- 
erty of  Lloyd.  That,  however,  is  a matter 
of  taste,  and  it  makes  no  difference,  so  far 
as  the  swindle  upon  the  Government  is  con- 
cerned, whose  name  is  used  for  the  purpose 
of  filching  thousands  upon  thousands  of 
dollars  from  the  public  treasury  without 
any  corresponding  benefit  to  the  Govern- 
ment. It  is  not  worth  while  to  mince  the 
matter  at  all ; it  is  simply  an  infamous  and 
disgraceful  swindle  upon  the  Government, 
more  scandalous  than  the  whisky-ring  ope- 
ration that  we  hear  so  much  of.  It  is  none 
the  less  a swindle  because  the  Committee  of 
Accounts  allow  it.  This  only  aggravates 
and  blackens  the  act.  It  will  loom  up  be- 
fore an  honest  people  as  a double-headed 
monster,  bearing  the  inscription  “ False- 
hood ” upon  one  head  and  “ swindlers  ” up- 
on the  other.  This  whole  bill  is  tor  inivate 
carriages  and  horses. 

The  bill,  as  it  appears  upon  the  record,  is 
very  far  from  giving  it  correctly. 

Bill  as  it  really  is : 

Horse  and  carriage  hire,  cartage,  &c 

One  watchman  at  stable 

One  superintendent  at  stable 

Eour  laborers 


There  is  another  thought  in  relation  to 
this  matter  that  might  be  looked  after  to 
some  profit ; that  is,  in  regard  to  those  two 
horses  that  are  charged  as  being  furnished 
by  Ed.  Spicer.  It  might  turn  out  that  he  had 
no  horse  at  all.  As  much  has  been  inti- 
mated in  regard  to  that  matter,  I simply 
call  attention  to  it.  The  Doorkeeper,  Chas. 
E.  Lippincott,  has  one  horse,  I believe,  and 
it  might  be  that  that  horse  has  been  magni- 
fied into  two  horses,  in  the  name  of  Spicer. 
This  would  not  astonish  me  if  it  should  turn 
out  to  be  the  case,  as  1 have  heard  of  other 
“ground  and  lofty  tumbling”  about  the 
Folding-room,  the  headquarters  of  Mr.  Spi- 
cer. As  that  department  will  receive  some 
attention  in  the  proper  place,  I will  leave  it 
for  the  present. 


POST  OFFICE. 

I shall  now  pay  my  respects  to  the  House 
Post  Office.  I shall  be  as  brief  as  the  nature 
of  the  case  will  allow. 

There  is  quite  a large  force  of  men  and 
horses  belonging  to  this  department.  Mr. 
King  is  the  Postmaster,  and  for  aught  V 
know  to  the  contrary,  he  is  a very  excellent 
officer;  but  as  I intend  going  through  the 
House  end  of  the  Capitol,  and  not  wishing 
to  show  partiality,  or  seem  unsocial,  I will 
drop  a few  hints  by  way  of  reminder,  that 
“ all  is  not  gold  that  glitters.”  Stick  a pin 
ther ",  Mr.  Postmaster. 

By  way  of  introduction,  I would  ask  the 
name  of  the  mail  contractor  in  the  House 
Post  Office,  as  I have  heard  some  suspicions 
about  foul  play  upon  one  S.  H.  Dunham, 
who  appears  upon  the  record  as  the  man 
who  carries  the  mail  and  hauls  the  docu- 
ments, and  upon  inquiry  of  those  around 
the  stable,  men  who  feed  and  take  care  of 
the  horses,  none  of  them  were  able  to  tell 
anything  about  Mr.  Dunham  ; they  say  that 
Messrs.  King  and  Stevens  are  the  contract- 
ors. In  my  inquiries  in  this  department,  I 
regard  Mr.  Dunham  as  a myth,  for  such  I 
believe  him  to  be  ; I shall  therefore  regard 
Mr.  King,  the  Postmaster,  and  Mr.  Stevens, 
his  chief  clerk,  as  the  real  mail  contractors. 

I propose  to  analyze  this  mail  service,  for 
of  all  the  monstrous  abuses  and  swindles 
connected  with  the  management  of  the  bu- 
siness of  the  House,  none  are  more  enor- 
mous and  unjustifiable  than  this  service. 
By  a reference  to  the  Clerk’s  report,  Jan- 
uary, 1868,  it  will  be  seen  that  there  are 
four  horses  and  carryalls,  at  an  expense  of 
$10  per  day,  kept  the  whole  year,  making 
$3,650  00  per  year,  and  in  addition  to  these 
four  horses  and  carryalls,  which  are  for  the 
letter  mail,  as  it  seems  there  are  two  other 
carryalls  kept  for  the  purpose  of  hauling 
documents  from  the  House  to  the  City  Post 
Office  or  the  depot.  This  document  hauling 
for  the  year  amounts  to  10,569  loads,  at  a 
cost  of  $5,284  50.  This  does  not  include  the 
hauling  of  documents  for  the  Clerk’s  office, 


$15,123  50 
1,000  00 
1,440  00 
3,000  00 


Total 


$20,563  59 


14 


•which  was  1,821  loads,  at  a cost  of  $910.50. 

The  cost  of  the  mail  service,  including 
the  document  hauling,  stands  as  follows  : - 


4 horses  and  carryalls,  at  $10  per  day $8,650  00 

Document  hauling 5,284  50 

Feed  of  horses 5.000  00 

5 carryall  and  wagon  drivers,  at  $1,080  each 

per  annum 1*.  5,400  00 

Proportion  of  cost  of  tends  at  stable 1,500  00 

Salary  of  postmaster 2,592  00 

Assistant  “ 2,088  00 

4 messengers,  at  $1,728.00 6,912  00 


Total $32,338  50 


This  table  seems  fabulous,  yet  every  item 
is  shown  upon  record,  and  can  not  be  dis- 
puted, except  the  item  of  forage,  which  is 
estimated  ; but  I believe  the  appropriations 
for  that  purpose  justify  the  estimate  that  I 
have  made ; but  leave  that  item  out  entirely, 
and  the  account  is  still  so  monstrous  that 
it  staggers  belief. 

The  following  statement,  showing  the 
expenditures  of  the  committees  named,  is 
made  up  from  H.  Mis.  Doc.  No.  31,  lid  ses- 
sion, 40th  Congress.  The  subject-matter 
upon  which  they  were  required  to  act  was 
mainly  political  in  its  nature.  The  immense 
expenditure  of  public  money,  occasioned  by 
their  appointment,  has  resulted  in  no  bene- 
fit to  the  people.  The  only  person  who  has 
been  profited  by  them  is  high  salaried  offi- 
cers, who  sought  their  appointment  as  a 
means  through  which  they  might  perpetu- 
ate their  power,  and  at  the  same  time  ap- 
propriate to  themselves  large  sums  of  the 
people’s  money.  The  statement,  however, 
speaks  for  itself : 

Committee  on  the  Treatment  of  Prisoners  of  T Far. 

J.  P.  C.  Shanks,  M.  C.,  118  days  board 

at  $6 $708  00 

4,520  miles  travel 452  00 

$1,160  00 

A.  F.  Stevens,  H.  C.,  70  days  board.. $420  00 

80  miles  travel 8 00 

428  00 

Sergeant-at-Arms 2,136  57 

Clerk,  witnesses,  etc 2,600  00 

$6,224  57 

Judiciary  Committee. 

Samuel  S.  Marshall,  M.  C.,  58  days 

board $348  00 

6,000  miles  travel 600  00 

$948  00 

Jas.  F. Wilson,  M.  C.,  47  days  board.. $282  00 

2,956  miles  travel i 295  60 

577  60 

C.  E.  Eldridge,  M.  C.,  38  days  board  $228  00 

2,784  miles  travel 278  41 

506  40 

J.  C.  Churchill,  M.  C.,  67  days  board.  .$402  00 

2,264  miles  travel 226  4l 

628  40 

F.  E.  Woodbridge,  M.  C.,  36  days 

board $216  00 

1,100  miles  travel 110  00 

326  00 

G.  S.  Boutwell,  M.  C.,  41  days  board.  .$246  00 

908  miles  travel 90  80 

336  80 

Thos. Williams,  M.  C.,  63  days  board.. $378  00 

760  miles  travel 76  00 

454  00 


Francis  Thomas,  M.C.,30daysboard.$189  00 

954  miles  travel 94  49 

$274  40 

Wm.  Lawrence,  M.C.,  41  days  board. $246  00 
1,194  miles  travel 119  40 


365  40 

Cash  to  G.  S.  Boutwell,  1 550  00 

Cash  to  J.  F.  Wilson,  l To  procure  610  00 

Cash  to  Wm.  Lawrence,  [ evidence,  300  00 

Cash  to  other  parties,  J 2.350  00 

Witnesses 6.500  00 

Sergeant-at-Arms  and  deputies 7,149  10 


$21,876  10 

Committee  on  Public  Expenditures. 

C.  T.  Hulburt,  M.  C.,  66  days  board  at 

, $6  per  day $396  00 

4,800  miles  travel,  at  10c 480  00 

$876  00 

E.  H.  Eollins,  M.  C.,  43  days  board, 

at  $6 $258  00 

1,392  miles  travel 139  20 

397  20 

J.  M.  Broomall,  M.  C„  11  days  board, 

at  $6 1 $66  00 

596  miles  travel 69  60 

135  60 

Stenographers,  62  days  board,  at  $6.. $368  00 

3,796  miles  travel..' 379  60 

746  60 

C.  D.  Hubbard,  M.  C.,  8 days  board, 

at  $6 $48  00 

400  miles  travel 40  00 

88  00 

Sergeant-at-Arms  and  assistants,  board, 
mileage,  expenses,  etc 3,072  40 

Carson  and  others,  for  procuring  evidence..  800  00 

Reporter ^ J.  178  00 

Estimate — witness  fees  and  incidental  ex- 
penses not  included  in  the  above 1,000  00 


$7,294  80 

Committee  on  Internal  Pevenue  Frauds. 


L.  S.  Tremble,  M.  C.,  24  days  board,' 

at  $6 $144  00 

1,229  miles  travel 122  00 


W.  A.  Darling,  M.  C.,  24  days  board, 

at  $6 $144  00 

1,220  miles  travel*. 122  00 


F.  C.  Beman,  M.  C.,  24  days  board,  at 

$6 $144  00 

1,220  miles  travel 122  00 


Leonard  Myers,  M.  C.,  24  days  board, 

at  $6 $144  00 

1,22  J miles  travel 122  00 


B.  F.  Eggleston,  M.C.,  24  days  board, 

at  $6 $144  00 

1,220  miles  travel 122  00 


Witnesses,  clerk  and  messenger. 
Sergeant-at-Arms,  etc 


$266  00 

266  00 

266  00 

266  00 

266  00 
1,200  00 
1,151  93 


$3,681  93 

Committee  on  Elections. 

Samuel  Shellabarger,  M.  C.,  15  days 

board $90  00 

944  miles  travel 94  40 

$184  40 

G.  W.  Schofield,  M.  C.,  23  days  board.$138  00 

1,173  miles  travel 117  30 

256  30 

B.  C.  Cook,  M.  C.,  18  days  board $108  00 

1,173  miles  travel 117  30 

225  30 

L.  G.  Poland,  M.  C.,  12  days  board..  $72  00 

1,200  miles  travel 120  00 

192  00 

H.  L.  Dawes,  M.  C.,  8 days  board $48  00 

320  miles  travel 32  00 

80  00 


15 


Sergeant-at-Arms . 1,233  23 

Witnesses — estimated 800  00 

Clerk 2,160  00 

Messenger 345  70 

Stenographers! 539  50 


* $6,009  93 

Committee  on  New  Orleans  Riots. 

T.  D.  Elliott,  M.  C.,  21  days’  board, 

at  $8 $168  00 

3,159  miles’ travel 315  90 

$483  90 


Statement  showing  the  amount  of  money  expend- 
ed by  the  committees  named , as  pen'  House  Mis. 
Doc.  No.  31,  2d  Sess.  40 th  Congress. 


Committee  on  Judiciary $21,876  00 

Do  Elections 6,600  00 

Do  Prisoners  of  War 6,214  00 

Do  New  Orleans  Biot 11,250  00 

Do  Pay  Department 7,983  00 

Do  Public  Expenditures 7,300  00 

Do  Bevenue  Brairds 3,700  00 

Do  Southern  Bailroads 4,636  00 


$69,465  00 


B.  M.  Boyer,  M.  C.,  21  days’  board, 

at  $8 $168  00 

3,159  miles’ travel 315  90 

483  90 

Samuel  Sbellabarger,  M.  CM  16  days’ 

board,  at  $8 $128  00 

3,159  miles’  travel 315  90 

443  90 


Sergeant-at-Arms  and  assistants 4,379  00 

Witnesses,  clerk,  etc. 4,16100 

Stenographers - 1,191  60 


$11,142  30 


Committee  on  Fay  Department. 


W.  S.  Lincoln,  M,  C.,  paid  for  use  of 
parlor  for  meeting  of  committee 

and  for  services $189  15 

49  days’  board 249  00 

3,736  miles’  travel 373  60 

A.  Cobb,  M.  C.,  26  days’  board $128  00 

2,440  miles’  travel 244  00 


G.  W.  Schofield,  M.  C.,  20  days’ board.  $120  00 
1,110  miles’  travel Ill  00 

W.  S.  Holman,  M.  C-,  7 days’  board.  $42  00 
1,538  miles’  travel 153  80 


Clerk  hire,  witnesses,  and  other  expenses.. 
Sergeant-at-Arms  and  assistants 


$856  75 
372  00 


231  00 


195  80 
4,500  00 
1,833  85 


$7,989  40 


Committee  on  Southern  Railroads. 


P.  Sawyer,  M.  C.,  20  days’  board,  at 


$6 $120  00 

3,034  miles’  travel 303  40 

$423  40 

Clerk..... 750  00 

W itnesses  and  other  expenses 1 , 700  00 

Sergeant-at-Arms 1,763  00 


$4,636  40 

The  foregoing  statement  shows  an  extrav- 
agant use  of  public  money,  that  is  certainly 
unequalled  in  the  annals  of  public  expendi- 
tures, and  especially  so  when  we  reflect  that 
almost  the  entire  sum  thus  expended  was 
for  political  purpose^  only.  It  will  be  re- 
membered that  none  of  these  committees, 
except  that  on  the  Judiciary  and  Elections, 
have  as  yet  made  a report  of  their  doings ; 
they  are,  therefore,  still  continued  for  the 
purpose  of  giving  to  a set  of  hungry  offi- 
cers whose  especial  vocation  is  to  feed  upon 
the  industry  of  the  people,  continued  em- 
ployment in  perambulating  over  the  country 
at  ten  cents  per  mile  and  six  to  eight  dol- 
lars per  day  for  board,  in  addition  to  tlieir 
already  enormously  high  salaries. 


This  dees  not  show  the  whole  expenses, 
as  large  items  have  been  held  back  for  the 
next  report  that  should  have  been  included 
in  the  above.  The  report  of  1869,  will  prove 
the  truth  of  my  statement 

The  item  for  board  included  in  the  above 
account  is  as  follows,  to  wit : 


Members  of  Congress,  1,172  days $7,171  30 

N.  G.  Ordway  and  deputies,  268 


Estimated  additional,  not  specifi- 


2,101  00 

E.  H.  Smith,  stenographer,  136  days 869  00 

H,  G.  Hayes,  63  “ 378  00 

Ben.  Pitman,  12  “ 96  00 

D.  L.  Eaton,  clerk,  21  “ 168  00 

L.  Harvey,  messenger,  29  “ 174  00 


1,701  $10,957  00 

Estimated,  to  which  add  board  and  expen- 
ses included  in  other  items 1,000  00 


Total $11,957  00 


All  the  persons  in  the  above  table,  except 
Harvey  and  Pitman,  are  receiving  large  sal- 
aries from  the  Government,  and  in  addition 
to  the  board-bills,  each  of  them  were  paid 
mileage,  as  follows : 


Members  of  Congress 63,248  miles 

F.  H.  Smith 9,528  “ 

B.  F.  Hayes 3,600  “ 

Ben.  Pitman 1,788  “ 

D.  L.  Eaton 3,159  “ 

L.  Harvey 278  “ 


N.  G.  Ordway  and  deputies.  190,000 


$6,324  83 
952  80 
360  00 
178  80 
315  90 
27  83 
19,000  00 


271,601  $27,163  10 

The  salaries  are  as  follows : 

Members  of  Congress $5,000  00 

F.  H.  Smith 4,380  00 

B.  F.  Hayes 4,380  00 

D.  L.  Eaton 2,160  00 

N.  G.  Ordway 2,592  00 


I have  given  more  space  to  the  examina- 
tion of  some  of  the  many  sources  of  extrav- 
agance than  was  intended  in  the  outset, 
but  there  are  so  many  fruitful  items  that  de- 
serve to  be  brought  to  the  attention  of  the 
tax-payers,  that  I find  it  exceedingly  diffi- 
cult to  confine  the  subject  to  a reasonable 
space.  I shall  endeavor,  however,  to  con- 
dense as  much  as  possible,  keeping  in  view 
my  original  purpose  of  bringing  to  the  at- 
tention of  the  people  the  infamous  swindles 
that  are  being  continually  perpetrated  upon 
their  industry  by  the  swarms  of  dishonest 
scoundrels  that  infest  the  country,  and  hold 
the  offices. 


\ 


16 


I have  presented  facts  enough  already  to 
condemn  any  party,  or  set  of  men,  that  au- 
thorize or  tolerate  the  scoundrelism  that  is 
going  on  every  day  under  the  very  nose  of 
Congress.  There  are  other  facts  connected 
with  this  infamous  ring  at  the  Capitol  that 
are  even  more  dark  and  damning  than  any- 
thing yet  brought  to  light.  I shall,  therefore, 
give  them  such  a notice  as  will,  I trust,  re- 
sult in  relieving  the  people,  to  some  extent, 
from  a continuation  of  some  of  the  more 
barefaced  and  inexcusable  of  these  outrages 
that  have  and  are  being  committed  daily. 

I refer  to  the  various  departments  of  the 
House,  which  are  sources  of  as  wanton  ex- 
travagance, in  my  judgment,  as  it  is  pos- 
sible to  find  anywhere  in  this  or  any  coun- 
try. 

I hope  the  reader  will  bear  in  mind  all 
the  facts  in  the  forepart  of  this  book,  in  re- 
gard to  stationery,  horse  and  carriage-hire, 
&c.  What  right  have  these  men  to  get 
thousands  of  dollars  from  the  pockets  of 
the  people,  who  are  toiling  night  and  day, 
and  depriving  themselves  and  families  in 
many  instances,  of  the  most  common  neces- 
saries of  life,  in  order  to  meet  the  demands 
of  the  tax-gatherer  to  supply  the  wants  of 
the  Government.  What  right  has  the  Com- 
mittee on  Accounts  to  take  thousands  of 
dollars  from  the  people’s  pockets  to  pay  the 
expense  Of  horses  and  carriages  for  the  offi- 
cers of  the  House,  at  an  expense  that  is  per- 
fectly fabulous,  while,  at  the  same  time, 
they  receive  enormous  salaries  from  the  Gov- 
ernment This  is  an  outrage  upon  common 
decency,  as  well  as  on  the  people  who  fur- 
nish the  money.  It  is  a disgrace  and  scan- 
dal to  the  House  of  Representatives  that 
they  should,  for  a single  day,  tolerate  such 
an  infamous  swjndle. 

Upon  the  adjournment  of  Congress,  Mr. 
McPherson  returns  to  his  home  in  Pennsyl- 
vania, and  remains  there  most  of  the  time 
during  vacations.  Congress  does  not  remain 
in  session  more  than  six  months  in  the  year. 
The  Clerk  is,  therefore,  away  from  the  Cap- 
itol at  least  half  the  year ; he  takes  his 
horses  and  carriage  home  with  him,  and  re- 
ceives his  pay  for  them  from  the  Govern- 
ment during  the  time  he  is  rusticating  at 
the  expense  of  Uncle  Sam. 

Is  this  honest,  is  it  fair  toward  the  tax- 
payers of  the  country  % He  does  not  stop 
there ; but  he  takes  one  of  the  Government 
employes  who  is  receiving  $74  dollors  per 
month,  with  him  as  a servant,  to  take  care 
of  the  horses  and  drive  his  carriage.  He 
appoints  one  James  S.  Crawford  to  a lucra- 
tive position,  upon  his  pay-rolls — I mean  pay- 
roll, for  the  pay  is  all  there  is  in  it,  as  Mr. 
Crawford  has  never  been  in  the  city  of  Wash- 
ington— not  even,  as  I have  been  informed, 
on  a visit  to  his  friend  and  relative,  the 
honorable  Clerk  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives. The  Clerk’s  report  discloses 
the  fact  of  Mr.  Crawford  being  upon  the 
pay-rolls  of  his  office,  and  the  fact  that 
he  (Crawford)  never  performed  any  ser-  [ 


vices  for  the  Government,  and  the  further 
fact  that  he  never  was  in  Washington,  was 
communicated  to  me  by  an  individual  who  is 
now  living  a neighbor  to  Mr.  Crawfoid  in 
the  town  of  Gettysburg,  Pennsylvania,  and 
whose  statement  I believe  to  be  true  in 
every  particular.  The  first  place  that  Craw- 
ford’s name  appears,  as  far  as  I have  been 
able  to  see,  was  on  the  engineer’s  pay-rolls ; 
the  next  is  the  Temporary  Clerk’s  rolls,  this 
last  roll  giving  him  $2,160  per  year;  quite 
a handsome  pension  for  an  old  gentleman 
who  was  not  wounded  in  the  service  of  his 
country. 

One  other  item  in  this  connection  deserves 
some  notice,  as  it  involves  the  expenditure 
of  several  thousand  dollars.  The  following 
is  the  item : 

Anna  E.  "Ward,  watcher  and  keeping  fires  in 

furnaces  under  folding  room $110  19 

This  item  may  be  found  each  month  for 
the  last  three  or  four  years  in  the  Clerk’s 
report  upon  the  contingent  expenses  of  the 
House. 

This  lady  is  paid  $3.60  per  day,  amounting 
for  the  year  to  $1,314,  less  government  tax. 

The  facts  in  the  case  are,  that  another  par- 
ty performs  this  service,  for  which  he  re- 
ceives $720  per  annum.  If  any  one  will 
take  the  trouble  to  examine  the  appropria- 
tion bills,  they  can  find  the  payment  for 
that  identical  service  provided  for  specifi- 
cally, and  in  the  same  language  used  iu  the 
Clerk’s  report,  in  this  charge  to  Mrs.  Ward- 

These  swindling  transactions  are  augment, 
ed  the  more  minutely  as  an  investigation  is 
prosecuted.  In  fact,  they  are  so  voluminous 
as  to  encompass  an  encyclopedia  of  corrup- 
tions unparalleled  in  the  history  of  any  peo- 
ple on  earth.  We  think  we  have  pointed 
out  a sufficiency  of  facts  to  induce  a more 
elaborate  and  thorough  sweeping  of  the 
“ Augean  Stable  ” by  those  who  are  the  guar- 
dians of  the  public  weal,  and  who  may  have 
the  power  to  send  for  persons  and  papers. 

doorkeeper’s  department. 

Insignificant  and  humble  as  this  name 
would  indicate,  it  is  nevertheless  one  of  the 
most  powerful  of  all  the  departments  con- 
nected with  the  House  of  Representatives. 
Its  power  is  wielded  with  great  effect  upon 
legislation  of  the  country,  aud  especially  is 
it  most  potent  in  matters  connected  with 
the  contingent  expenses  of  the  House.  This, 
in  part,  arises  from  the  fact  that  almost 
every  member  of  Congress  has  his  man  upon 
the  Doorkeeper’s  rolls,  or  at  least  each  State 
has  quite  a number.  Those  men,  as  a rule, 
receive  their  appointments  through  the  in- 
fluence of  members  of  Congress.  They  are 
generally  selected  for  the  place  on  account 
of  their  services  in  political  matters  at  home, 
This  being  the  case,  it  is  readily  seen  that 
those  men  who  aided  greatly  in  the  election 
of  members  to  Congress,  have  quite  an  in- 
fluence over  their  action,  especielly  when 
fhe  interest  of  the  Doorkeeper’s  department 
is  at  stake.  I think  I may  safely  say  that 


17 


there  was,  during  the  year  1868,  not  less 
than  one  hundred  and  fifty  men  belonging 
to  that  department.  The  folding-room  and 
congressional  committee,  <fcc  , <fcc.,  are  a 
part  of  this  department.  The  folding-room 
however,  is  the  scape-goat  for  all  kinds  of 
abuses  and  swindles,  not  only  against  indi- 
viduals who  belong  to  it,  but  against  the 
Government,  as  I shall  be  able  to  show  be- 
fore I get  through  the  inquiry  I propose  to 
make. 

This  folding-room  roll  furnishes  clerks  to 
committees  that  the  House  refuses  to  allow ; 
the  Republican  Congressional  Committee  is 
also  supplied  from  this  department  Avith  its 
force,  to  a great  extent ; clerks  to  individual 
members  of  Congress  are  also  drawn  from 
this  army  of  employes ; and  the  Lord  only 
knows,  for  I don’t  believe  anybody  else  does, 
where  all  this  vast  number  of  men  is  em- 
ployed ; for  sure  it  is,  that  not  half  of  them, 
at  any  one  time,  are  on  duty  about  the 
Capitol. 

A minute  inquiry  into  the  stupendous 
abuses  aud  swindling  that  is  carried  on  in 
this  department  would  till  a volume  of  no 
small  dimensions.  I shall,  therefore,  be  com- 
pelled to  stop  far  short  of  doing  full  justice 
to  this  branch  of  my  inquiry.  The  salaries 
and  pay  of  employes  in  this  department  can 
not  be  less  than  $150,000  per  annum,  (I  in- 
cline to  believe  the  amount  much  larger.) 
I presume  that  the  public  will  never  know 
the  vast  amount  of  money  expended  through 
this  department  for  the  year  ending  June  30, 
1868,  as  that,  with  many  other  enormous 
expenditures,  if  given  in  detail,  would  create 
such  a storm  of  furious  indignation,  among 
the  masses  of  the  people,  that  the  authors 
and  perpetrators  of  such  outrages  would  be 
compelled,  for  personal  safety,  to  fly  to  the 
mountains  and  desert  places  for  refuge  from 
the  merited  vengeance  of  the  honest,  toiling 
^millions  of  the  country,  on  account  of  their 
base  betrayal  of  the  sacred  trust  confided  to 
them. 

It  is  no  uncommon  thing  for  men  to  be 
kept  on  the  pay  rolls  of  this  department  who 
are  never  required  to  perform  any  service 
whatever.  Thousands  of  dollars  are  filched 
from  the  Treasury  annually  in  this  way,  and 
there  are  large  numbers  of  others  who  do 
not,  upon  an  average,  devote  one-half  of  their 
time  (even  during  sessions  of  Congress)  to 
the  performance  of  any  service  for  the  Gov- 
ernment. In  fact,  the  number  is  so  great, 
that  not  one-half  of  them  can  be  furnished 
with  anything  to  do,  or  even  a place  except 
upon  the  pay-rolls. 

The  expenses  of  this  department  can  be 
reduced  at  least  one-half  without  any  detri- 
ment to  the  public  service ; but  instead  of  a 
reduction,  the  tendency  is  to  increase  the 
already  fabulous  expenses  of  the  depart- 
ment. 

There  is  another  source  of  swindling  con- 
nected with  it  that  I can  not  pass  unnoticed, 
for  it  is  even  more  vicious  and  scandalous 
2 


than  the  employment  of  a force  twice  as 
large  as  the  demands  of  the  service  require, 
and  the  keeping  of  men  upon  the  rolls  with- 
out requiring  their  presence  at  all. 

It  has  been  a custom  for  some  years  past 
for  the  House  to  pass  a resolution  at  the  end 
of  the  session  authorizing  the  Doorkeeper  to 
retain  the  employes  during  the  vacation. 
Upon  the  adjournments,  the  Doorkeeper, 
through  the  superintendent  of  the  folding- 
room,  informs  the  men  in  his  department 
that  they  can  return  to  their  homes,  and 
remain  there  until  the  next  meeting  of  Con- 
gress, upon  condition  that  they  pay  an 
amount  sufficient  to  hire  substitutes,  or  per- 
sons not  on  the  rolls,  to  do  the  work  in  the 
folding-room  that  would  be  required  of  them 
during  the  recess.  This  proposition  looked 
so  reasonable,  that  a large  number  of  those 
living  remote  from  Washington  availed 
themselveS  of  the  privilege  of  returning  to 
their  homes  upon  the  conditions  mentioned. 

During  the  recess  of  last  summer  (1867) 
the  pay  of  those  who  were  at  home  was  sent 
to  them,  less  the  amount  claimed  to  pay  the 
substitutes.  The  money  thus  withheld  lor 
the  purpose  of  paying  substitutes,  as  claim- 
ed, amounted  to  several  thousand  dollars  in 
the  aggregate. 

Upon  making  inquiry  in  regard  to  this 
matter,  it  was  ascertained  that  no  substi- 
tutes had  been  employed  in  the  folding-room 
during  the  vacations,  except,  perhaps,  one 
during  the  first  recess,  which  was  only  three 
months.  The  swindle  was  so  outrageous  and 
apparent,  that  a submission  to  it  would  have 
been  a cowardly  surrender  to  the  most  vil- 
lainous schemes  that  dishonesty  could  have 
invented.  The  money  was  paid  to,  or  rather 
retained  by  Mr.  Spicer,  the  superintendent 
of  the  folding-room,  a subordinate  of  the 
Doorkeeper,  Mr.  Charles  E.  Lippincott.  Up- 
on learning  the  fact  in  regard  to  the  swindle, 
Mr.  Lippincott  was  requested  to  take  such 
steps  as  would  cause  the  money,  thus  wrong- 
fully withheld  from  the  men,  to  be  at  once 
refunded.  His  attention  was  called  to  the 
matter  by  a letter  addressed  to  him  on  the 
first  of  June,  detailing  all  the  facts  in  rela- 
tion to  the  matter,  and  also  one  of  the  par- 
ties, who  had  paid  $150  into  the  substitute 
fund,  explained  to  him  with  great  exactness 
the  particulars  in  regard  to  the  whole  affair. 
The  letter  addressed  to  the  Doorkeeper  is 
too  lengthy  to  insert  here. 

The  following  is  the  reply : 

“ June  4,  1868. 

“ Will  give  this  my  attention,  but  I know  already 
that  there  is  a great  exaggeration  in  your  estimate. 
One  thing  I may  say : hfooody  need  pay  for  a substi- 
tute, and  if  one  choses  to  go  home  at  a certain  price, 
it  is  hardly  worth  while  to  talk  of  frauds  as  between 
him  and  the  superintendent  of  the  folding-room.  As 
I said  before,  the  matter  shall  have  my  attention  as 
soon  as  possible. 

“C.  E.  LiPPiNcdTT.” 

This  answer  needs  but  little  comment.  It 
is  a simple  begging  of  the  question,  it  was 
supposed  by  those  who  paid  their  money 


18 


that  they  were  dealing  with  honest  men, 
and  the  amount  to  he  paid  for  substitutes 
was  what  the  hiring  of  them  would  cost;  and 
if  an  equal  assessment  had  been  made  upon 
all  who  were  upon  the  rolls,  and  who  did 
not  work  during  the  recess,  one  or  two  per 
cent,  a month  would  have  paid  the  whole 
substitute  expense,  for  it  could  not  have 
exceeded  $400.  The  facts  are,  that  every 
one  who  worked  in  the  folding-room,  except- 
ing one,  from  April  1 to  July  1,  received 
their  pay  from  the  Government,  as  the  pay- 
roll, published  in  the  Clerk’s  report,  will 
show';  also,  the  Blue  Book  for  1867  shows 
the  same  facts. 

This  matter  was  allowed  to  rest  for  sev- 
eral days,  with  a hope  that  the  Doorkeeper 
would  see  that  justice  was  done  in  the  prem- 
ises. Delay  seemed  to  be  the  game  that  was 
being  played,  in  order  to  avoid  a . refunding 
of  the  money.  It,  therefore,  became  appar- 
ent, that  nothing  would  be  done  in  the  mat- 
ter through  that  officer.  The  attention  of 
several  members  of  Congress  was  called  to 
the  subject,  but  without  any  different  result. 
It  now  became  certain  that  vigorous  sk'ps 
should  be  taken  in  the  matter,  as  this  session 
would  soon  terminate,  which  would  leave 
them  in  full  possession  of  their  ill-gotten 
gain,  as  there  would  be  no  power  after  the 
adjournment  to  compel  them  to  disgorge. 

On  the22d  of  June,  a letter  was  addressed 
to  Hon.  Speaker  Colfax,  as  the  organ  of  the 
House,  explaining  very  minutely  all  the 
facts  in  the  case,  with  a request  to  cause  the 
money  thus  wrongfully  withheld  to  be  re- 
funded at  once,  or  bring  the  matter  to  the 
attention  of  the  House,  for  the  purpose  of 
making  the  proper  inquiry  in  regard  to  it; 
and  if  the  charges,  upon  an  investigation, 
were  found  to  be  true,  to  have  the  guilty 
parties  exposed  and  punished.  The  writer 
of  the  letter,  however,  was  informed  by  an 
honorable  member  of  Congress  that  his  honor 
the  Speaker  would  have  nothing  to  do  with 
the  subject. 

That  left  but  one  other  remedy,  that  of 
presenting  the  whole  case  to  the  public. 
Not  that  the  public  are  interested  in  the 
subject  as  between  the  parties  in  the  con- 
troversy, but  they  are  interested  to  know 
whether  or  not  men  holding  high  positions 
will  be  permitted  to  perpetrate  such  high- 
handed villainies,  and  the  injured  parties  to 
appeal  in  vain  to  the  only  tribunal  that  pos- 
sessed the  power  to  redress  the  wrong. 

This  refusal  of  the  honorable  Speaker  to 
bring  the  matter  to  the  attention  of  the 
House,  is  but  another  evidence  of  the  fact 
that  the  people  all  over  this  country,  without 
regard  to  former  party  affiliations,  are  be- 
ginning to  realize  the  utter  corruption  and 
demoralization  of  the  Republican  party  as 
such.  I do  not  make  this  charge  against 
individual  members  of  Congress  or  of  the 
party,  for  I have  good  reason  to  know  that 
the  Republican  members  of  Congress,  and 
the  members  of  the  party  general '.y,  as  indi- 


[ viduals,  possess  as  much  purity  of  character, 
and  as  high  a degree  of  personal  honor  and 
integrity  as  "others;  but  as  a party  organi- 
zation, it  does  not  possess  pne  j>article  of 
honesty,  integrity,  or  common  decency.  It 
has  become  the  mere  tender  to  the  infamous, 
swindling,  stock -jobbing  rings  that  feed 
upon  the  honest  industry  of  the  country, 
from  the  Capitol  in  Washington,  to  the  most 
remote  coiners  of  the  globe.  It  is  not 
strange,  therefore,  that  a deaf  ear  should 
be  turned  to  a request,  in  th“  most  respectful 
terms,  to  look  into  a matter  where  one  of  the 
principal  officers  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives was  charged  with  swindling  to 
the  amount  of  thousands,  by  obtaining  mo- 
ney under  false  pretences. 

The  reason  for  this  refusal  is  apparent ; 
for  if  the  rotten  carcass  was  but  stirred,  the 
stench  of  its  vile  corruptions  would  cause 
the  honest  masses  of  the  people  tu  turn  with 
loathing  and  disgust  from  the  putrid  form, 
that  has  robbed  the  industrial  classes  of  the 
country  of  the  fruits  of  their  labor,  for  the 
purpose  of  lavishing  it  upon  the  high-sala- 
ried official,  in  paying  for  horse  and  carriage- 
hire,  board  bills,  mileage,  &c. 

I have  already  mentioned  the  fact  of  per 
sons  being  kqpt  upon  the  Doorkeeper’s  pay- 
rolls without  being  required  to  perform  any 
service.  As  an  instance,  I call  attention  to 
the  name  of  H.  Taylor.  It  is  notorious  to 
almost  every  person  connected  with  the  de- 
partment* that  Mr.  Taylor  has  never  been 
required  to  perform  any  service  in  the  fold- 
ing-room, or  in  any  other  place  connected 
with  the  department,  yet  he  is  receiving 
$120  per  month.  (See  Clerk’s  report.)  I 
am  also  informed  that  there  are  some  facts 
connected  with  his  appointment  that  would 
not  reflect  much  credit  upon  those  connect- 
ed with  it  if  they  were  made  public.  I for- 
bear to  give  particulars.  It  is  for  the  House 
to  inquire.  # 

The  next  case  is  where  an  individual  com-  * 
menced  service,  as  I am  informed,  about  the 
20th  of  the  month ; when  he  applied  tor  his 
pay,  however,  to  his  astonishment  it  was 
made  out  for  the  whole  month.  When  he 
received  his  money,  he  was  confronted  by 
the  superintendent  of  the  folding- room  with 
a demand  for  ninety  odd  dollars,  stating  at 
the  time  that  he,  the  superintendent,  had  a 
man  on  from  the  1st  of  the  month  until  the 
20th,  and  that  the  money  was  to  pay  him. 
Query  : Why  was  not  the  name  of  the  man, 
who,  it  was  said,  served  in  this  case  twenty 
days,  placed  upon  the  pay-rolls,  so  that  he 
himself  could  sign  the  rolls  and  receive  his 
money,  he  having  served  two-thirds  of  the 
month,  instead  of  the  one  who  had  served 
but  ten  days  being  required  to  sign  the  rolls 
for  the  whole  month,  and  receiving  only 
about  $20  of  the  money  'i  Who  can  answer 
the  query  % 

Having  gone  through  with  this  very  im- 
perfect examination  of  the  more  important 
items  of  expenditure  of  the  House  of  Repre- 


19 


sentatives,  I will  simply  add,  that  the  ex- 
travagance of  the  United  States  Senate  is 
fully  equal  to  that  of  the  House',  but  as  that 
honorable  body  has  not  required  the  officer 
charged  with  the  disbursement  of  the  con- 
tingent fund  to  make  a report  for  the  last 
year,  we  are  left  in  the  dark,  e^ept  as  to 
the  aggregate  expenditure. 

- CONCLUSION. 

It  is  scarcely  worth  while  to  ask  who  is 
responsible  for  the  wanton  extravagance 
and  waste  of.  the  people’s  money  as  exhibit- 
ed in  the  foregoing  pages.  In  the  waste 
that  is  shown  in  regard  to  the  distribution 
of  stationery  and  other  articles  furnished 
for  the  use  of  the  House,  the  distributing 
officers  have  a greater  individual  responsi- 
bility tban  any  one  else,  as  all  such  matters 
are  entrusted  to  them.  In  regard  to  keep- 
ing the  names  of  persons  upon  the  pay-rolls 
whose  services  arc  not  required,  also  the 
enormous  cost  of  horse  and  carriage-hire, 
&c.,  the  head  of  each  department  has  an 
individual  responsibility  in  proportion  to 
the  scandalous  waste  that  has  been  perpe- 
trated under  their  supervision.  The  Com- 
mittee on  Accounts,  however,  whose  duty  it 
is  to  scan  closely  every  item  of  the  expend- 
iture from  the  contingent  fund,  have  shown 
inmyjudgmentjthemost  shameful  stupidity 
and  ignorance,  or  the  most  criminal  disre- 
gard of  the  high  trust  confided  to  them  in 
matters  connected  with  the  expenditure  of 
public  money.  Instead  of  standing  at  the 
door  of  the  Treasury,  with  a two-edged 
sword,  to  guard  well  the  entrance  to  the 
people’s  money,  as  was  their  duty,  it  would 
seem  that  they  had  abandoned  their  post, 
and  allowed  each  one  who  chose  to  make 
his  grab  without  let  or  hindrance.  But  the 
responsibility  mentioned  is  subordinate  to 
the  great  controlling  power  of  the  radical 
Congress  that  appropriates  the  money  ; for 
not  one  cent  can  be  used  for  any  purpose 
whatever,  except  it  is  first  authorized  by  an 


act  of  Congress.  The  appointment  of  an 
unheard  of  number  of  special  committees, 
with  unparalleled  expenditures  attending 
them,  and  that  too  for  political  aggrandize- 
ment, is  a responsibility  that  this  radical 
Congress  can  not  shift,  or  avoid.  The  Demo- 
cratic members  who  were  appointed  upon 
those  committees,  did  but  their  duty  in 
agreeing  to  serve,  as  those  committees  were 
appointed  without  their  consent,  and  in 
most  instances  against  their  most  solemn 
protest.  The  whole  responsibility,  there- 
fore, rests  upon  the  radical  party. 

If  I have  failed  to  convince  the  reader  of 
the  truth  of  the  proposition  that  1 announc- 
ed in  the  beginning — the  most  scandalous, 
villainous,  and  dishonest  squandering  of 
public  money — the  fault  is  my  own,  and  not 
the  facts  as  they  really  exist  I have  en- 
deavored, however,  in  the  examination  of 
the  subject,  to  present  them  in  the  most 
plain  and  forcible  light  that  a due  regard 
to  truth  and  fair  dealing,  as  between  the 
swindlers  and  the  people,  would  permit. 

I have  omitted  the  mention  of  many  facts 
of  great  interest  to  the  public,  in  regard  to 
the  abuses  4hat  are  of  daily  occurrence  in 
the  management  of  the  House  expenditures. 

I trust,  however,  that  an  indulgent  public 
will  treat  with  forbearance  the  defects  and 
imperfections  found  in  the  foregoing  pages, 
as  my  only  purpose  in  presenting  them  is 
the  public  good. 


It  is  alleged  that  the  stationery  account  for  1868  is 
over-stated;  if  that  be  true,  the  same  may  he  said 
with  regard  to  1864,  for  the  same  exhibits,  A,  B,  and 
C,  were  used  in  both  cases.  The  rate  of  increase  is 
the  same  in  either  base.  Exhibit  C is  stationery 
used  in  Clerk’s  office. 


Stationery  for  Clerk’s  office,  1868 $3,000 

“ “ “ 1864 1,000 

Excess  of  1868  over  1864 $2,000 


The  same  per  cent,  of  increase  is  sh^wu  in  the 
whole  stationery  account. 


3 011 


2 042493103 


